STATE OF HARYANA Vs. SONIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS judgment would dispose of Murder Reference No. 3 of 2004 and Criminal Appeal No. 556-DB of 2004, as the judgment of conviction, dated May 27, 2004 and, order of sentence, dated May 31, 2004, are under scrutiny and challenge.

(2.) MURDER is a heinous act by which a life is brought to an end prior to the period for which it may have continued to exist. Such act has always been looked down upon by the society since ages. The very usage of the word contemplates an act committed by a third person qua the first person. Such act has been considered and has been delved upon by the society through legislation, executive act and the judicial scrutiny, which are the creations of the society for its own governance.

(3.) IT has been seen over the years that the aforestated acts on the part of the society did leave some grey areas, which have fallen into the domain of judicial dispensation to form guide-lines for future generation. The cardinal principles are followed even today i.e. testing such act by the one, upon whom the onerous duty has been casted. In this endeavour, the precedents are also tested and re-tested, sometimes they are explained and sometimes they are extended to bring within the circumference the factual disclosures of a particular act. The application of legal acumen becomes more acute when the act of murder, if established, has to be further weighed for taking the life of the person who acted in committing the heinous crime. Murder is always linked with the crime but the degree of crime has to be examined vis-a-vis the facts and the circumstances unrevelled by the prosecution. The judicial system has also to perform the duty to scrutinise and appreciate the act and conduct of the prosecution in establishing the guilt. The Courts have performed such duties on being guided by the factual dispensation by ultimate equilibrium arrived at in their conscience by applying the rigour of caution and emaculate analysis of facts divulged.