# RAGHUBIR SINGH v. STATE OF HARYANA February 12, 197 4

- **Citation:** [1974] 3 S.C.R. 356
- **Court:** Supreme Court of India
- **Decided:** 1971-06-06
- **Case number:** Criminal Appeal No. 124 of 1973
- **Bench:** V. R. Krishna Iyer, R. S. Sarkaria
- **Source:** https://unisonlegal.in/judgment/supreme-court-of-india/raghubir-singh-v-state-of-haryana-february-12-197-4-6061
- **Pages:** 2

## Headnote

Murder-Death penalty when ca11 be reduced to life in1prisonn1ent.
The appellant developed illicit intimacy with
the
deceased.
When the
A
B
deceased feigned pregnancy and pressed him to marry her, he gave ~er a deadly
poison mixed in milk. On the dea:th of the deceased he wrappecJ the d-.!ad body
in a-blanket.and Left it in a railway compartment. He was
cOD\'icted
and
senteDced to death.
C
On appeal to this Court on the question of sentence :
HELD : While murder in its aggravated form and in the abs~nce of extenuat·
ing factors connected with crime, criminal or legal process, still is condignly
visited with death penalty, a compassionate alternative of life im,P.risonment in
all other circumstances is gaining judicial ground. [357 G-H]
Iri the instant case a few ameliorative features fall to
be
noticed since
judicial temper has more components than indignation against murder.
The
D
appellant is in his twenties, not irrelevant in considering death sentence.
He
was a married man.
He was promiscuous with women, a salacious sin for
which the deceased was a contributory. Tue latter's pressure to get him to
marry her must have planted the seed of murderous
thought in him.
He
bargained for romance, encouraged by the victim but her pretended pregnancy
upset. the appellant.
Some planning and treachery have aggravated the crime.
Yet another circumstance is that the man was sentenced to death nearly two
years ago and the_ spectre of death penalty must have tormented his ~ouL Taken
E
separately, none of these matters may suffice to commute but the conspectus of
factors, personal ·and social, tilt th_e scales in favour -Of life term. [357 El
CIUMINA!. APPELLATE JURISDICTION ;. Criminal Appeal No. 124
of 1973.
·
Appeal by special leave from the judgment and order dated the 30th
November, 1972· of the Punjab and Haryana High Court in Criminal
F
Appeal No. 632 of 1972 and Murder Ref. No. 27 of 1972.
Nuruddin Ahmed and S. K. Mehta, for the appellant.
Gautam Goswami and R. N. Sachthey, for the respondent.

## Text

356
RAGHUBIR SINGH
v.
STATE OF HARYANA
February 12, 197 4.
[V. R. KRISHNA IYER AND R. S. SARKARIA, JJ.)
Murder-Death penalty when ca11 be reduced to life in1prisonn1ent.
The appellant developed illicit intimacy with
the
deceased.
When the
A
B
deceased feigned pregnancy and pressed him to marry her, he gave ~er a deadly
poison mixed in milk. On the dea:th of the deceased he wrappecJ the d-.!ad body
in a-blanket.and Left it in a railway compartment. He was
cOD\'icted
and
senteDced to death.
C
On appeal to this Court on the question of sentence :
HELD : While murder in its aggravated form and in the abs~nce of extenuat·
ing factors connected with crime, criminal or legal process, still is condignly
visited with death penalty, a compassionate alternative of life im,P.risonment in
all other circumstances is gaining judicial ground. [357 G-H]
Iri the instant case a few ameliorative features fall to
be
noticed since
judicial temper has more components than indignation against murder.
The
D
appellant is in his twenties, not irrelevant in considering death sentence.
He
was a married man.
He was promiscuous with women, a salacious sin for
which the deceased was a contributory. Tue latter's pressure to get him to
marry her must have planted the seed of murderous
thought in him.
He
bargained for romance, encouraged by the victim but her pretended pregnancy
upset. the appellant.
Some planning and treachery have aggravated the crime.
Yet another circumstance is that the man was sentenced to death nearly two
years ago and the_ spectre of death penalty must have tormented his ~ouL Taken
E
separately, none of these matters may suffice to commute but the conspectus of
factors, personal ·and social, tilt th_e scales in favour -Of life term. [357 El
CIUMINA!. APPELLATE JURISDICTION ;. Criminal Appeal No. 124
of 1973.
·
Appeal by special leave from the judgment and order dated the 30th
November, 1972· of the Punjab and Haryana High Court in Criminal
F
Appeal No. 632 of 1972 and Murder Ref. No. 27 of 1972.
Nuruddin Ahmed and S. K. Mehta, for the appellant.
Gautam Goswami and R. N. Sachthey, for the respondent.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by
KRISHNA IYER, J. A young woman was vomitted into death by a
young man by giving her a cup of milk mixed with a lethal dose of
stricnine. He, along with two others, bundled the cadaver into a Delhibound train but the coach cleaner discovered it, the police unearthed
the crime, the court convicted the culprits awarding capital sentence
to the killer and lighter punishments to the two accessories after the
fact, under s. 201, I.P.C. Special leave has been granted to the only
appellant on the sole ground of sentence and so our scrutiny is confined to the circumstances of the crime and criminal and the penological propriety of inflicting the higher or lesser punishment.
G
H
' '
A
B
c
D
E
F
G
H
RAGHUBIR SINGH v. HARYANA (Krishna Iyer, I.)
357
Twenty six-years-old Raghubir Singh-the appellant-was a lesser official in the Malaria Eradication Department in Gorior, a village
in Rajasthan. He became friends
with a veterinary official,
Sri
Sharma, P.W. 13, and by a concatenation of innocent circumstances
the appellant came into carnal comity with Kailashw'ati, the 2nd accused, a midwife in a local hospital. Later, the appellant was transferred to a viUage Mandhapia in the Family Planning Department
where he came across Sushma Thomas, a nurse in the same department. Prurient Raghubir picked up a liaison with this malayalee
belle older to him by five years and-going by the medical evidence,
not a virgin. She seems to have feigned pregnancy probably to force
a matrimony for which Raghubir was reluctant.
After many twists
and turns of events, on June 6, 1971, the appellant secured half a grain
of stricnine hydrochloride from Sharma, the friend, on the pretext that
it was needed for killing stray dogs. This Sharma's naivete in supplying poison looks suspicious and it is for Government to look into, remembering that he was more than a dispensing cheiuist in this case.
Anyway, the amorou.s pair spent the night of the 10th June at the
quarters of the 2nd accused, and the appellant brought milk for the
deceased who consumed the cup of death. After agonising hours of
vomitting struggle, she breathed her last, was wrapped in a blanket
and given a railway burial.
The criminal act was treacherous murder and deserved the sterner
sentence. But a few ameliorative features fall to be noticed since judicial temper has more components than indignation against murder.
The convict is in his twenties1 not irrelevant in considering death sen·
tence. He is said to be a married man.
He was promiscuous with
women, a solacious sin for which the deceased was a contributory. The
latter's pressure to get him to marry her must have planted the seed
of murderous thought in him. He bargained for romance, encouraged
by the victim but the pregnancy-though pretended-in a society
which views unmarried .mothers as vicious upset the appellant.
These have no bearing on guilt at all but attenuate the lethal touch of
the sentence.
Some planning · and treachery have aggravated the
crime, which also must not be ove\:looked. Yet another circumstance.
The man was sentenced to death as early as 23rd May, 1972, and for
twenty months the spectre o( death penalty must have tormented his
soul. Taken separately, none of these may suffice to commute but the
conspectus .of factors, personal and social, tilt the scales in favour of
a life term, We have in another case discussed at some kngth how
modern penology leans less towards death penalty and the winds of
criminological
change blow over Indian statutory thought.
While
murder in its aggravated for.m and in the absence of extenuating factors connected with crime, criminal or legal process, still is condignly
visited with death penalty, a compassionate alternative of life imprisonment in all other circumstances is gaining judicial ground. Taking an
overall view of forensic clemency we modify the death sentence and
direct the appellant to ~uffer imprisonment for life.
P.B.R.
Appeal allowed in part.