The Court in State of U.P. v. Sarvan and connected appeals confirmed the death penalty awarded to a man who committed the murder of his wife and children on account of an illicit relationship with his bhabhi (sister-in-law) in the year 2009.
The facts, in brief, are that the two accused, namely, Sarvan (murder convict) and Smt. Suman( Sarvan’s bhabhi) were tried by the Special Judge, C.B.I. Court No.2/Additional Sessions. Sarvan was charged u/s 323, 201, and 302 IPC (death sentence) whereas Suman was charged u/s 201 IPC. Aggrieved with their aforesaid conviction and sentences, both the accused filed appeals against the trial court’s verdict.
Hence, the High Court is deciding both appeals by a common order.
The events were unfolded before the High Court and they were barbaric, to say the least. It is the case of the prosecution that gossip/talk spread throughout the village that Sarvan (convict/appellant) had an illicit relationship with his bhabhi (sister-in-law) Suman, on account of which, there was a lot of quarrel between Sarvan (convict/appellant) and his wife Smt. Santoshi (deceased). Often this quarrel escalated and Sarvan would beat his wife. Smt. Madhuri (informant’s wife, also deceased) would usually intervene in such a situation to protect Santoshi because of which Sarvan remained angry with Smt. Madhuri (informant’s wife).
On the fateful day of 25.04.2009, at 06:30 a.m., an altercation took place between Sarvan and his wife. After that a sound of shouting came from Sarvan’s house. He was yelling inside his house and told his wife Santoshi that today he would not leave her and her children alive. Meanwhile, screams and cries for help from the wife were coming out of the house. On hearing the screams, Smt. Madhuri (informant’s wife) ran to save her At that moment, Sarvan armed with a blood-stained ‘axe’ came out of his house saying to Smt. Madhuri that he had put Santoshi and three children in their place and you intervene a lot. Subsequent to this, Sarvan attacked Smt. Madhuri with the same ‘axe’ many times, as a consequence of which she fell down on the khadanja (dirt road) and succumbed to her injuries on the spot. When Rajendra (informant’s son) and Sangeeta (informant’s daughter) ran to save their mother, Sarvan attacked them too with the same axe.
The Court observed that the FIR was lodged within one hour of the incident-in-question and that the written report given by PW1 contained a graphic description of the convict/ appellant Sarvan with a weapon in his hand and the manner in which the six deceased were murdered and one got injured as also the place of occurrence.
The Court noted that PW-1, P.W.2 and P.W.3 stood firm as a rock of Gibraltar by supporting the case of the prosecution and that there was no inconsistency in the oral testimony of PW-1 P.W.2 and P.W.3, the medical evidence and the testimony of the P.W.7, P.W.8, P.W.10, P.W.11, P.W.12, P.W.13 and C.W.1 and the reports such as inquest, site plan with regard to the injuries of the deceased and the place of occurrence.
It further observed that “Coming to the aggravating circumstances, we also find that convict/appellant Sarvan had committed murder of not only his wife but also his three minor children and two of his neighours. Postmortem reports disclose brutal, grotesque, diabolical murder, which clearly reflects the mindset of convict/appellant Sarvan.”
“The present incident was committed when convict/appellant Sarvan had illicit relationship with his bhabhi (sister-in-law). The manner in which offence was committed and also the magnitude of crime, in our view, places the present matter in the category of anti-social or socially abhorrent nature of crime. We concur with the finding of Trial Court that six persons were murdered by convict/appellant Sarvan in most brutal, grotesque, diabolical and dastardly manner arousing indignation and abhorrence of society which calls for an exemplary punishment. Three minor children including their mother and two of his neighbours have been murdered by convict/appellant Sarvan when they were helpless and nothing is on record to show that they aggravated the situation so as to arise sudden and grave passion on the part of convict/appellant Sarvan to commit such dastardly crime…….”
“....... He slayed six lives to quench his thirst. The entire incident is extremely revolting and shocks the collective conscience of the community. Murders were committed in gruesome, merciless and brutal manner…”
The Court therefore upheld the capital punishment.