Case Note & Summary
The review petitions were filed by Manoharan, the sole surviving accused, against the judgment of the Supreme Court dated 01.08.2019 which affirmed his conviction for the rape and murder of two children, a 10-year-old girl and her 7-year-old brother, and upheld the death sentence. The case arose from an incident on 29.10.2010 when the children were kidnapped while waiting for their school van. The prosecution's case was that Mohanakrishnan, a former van driver, along with his friend Manoharan, kidnapped the children, raped the girl, attempted to poison them, and finally threw them into the Parambikulam-Axhiyar Project Canal, causing their death by drowning. Mohanakrishnan was killed in a police encounter during investigation, leaving Manoharan as the sole accused. The trial court convicted Manoharan under Sections 120-B, 364-A, 376, 302 read with 34, and 201 IPC, awarding life imprisonment for rape and death sentence for murder. The Madras High Court set aside the conviction under Sections 120-B and 364-A but confirmed the remaining convictions and the death sentence. The Supreme Court, by majority, dismissed the appeal and confirmed the death sentence, holding it to be a rarest of rare case. In the review petition, the petitioner argued that there were errors apparent on the record, including misappreciation of evidence and failure to consider mitigating circumstances. The Court, however, found no merit in these contentions, noting that the review petition essentially sought a re-appreciation of evidence which is not permissible in review jurisdiction. The Court held that the grounds raised did not disclose any error apparent on the face of the record or any other sufficient reason to warrant review. The review petitions were accordingly dismissed.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Review Petition - Error Apparent on Record - The review petitioner sought review of the judgment affirming conviction and death sentence for offences under Sections 302, 376(2)(f) and (g) and 201 IPC - The Court held that the review petition did not disclose any error apparent on the face of the record or any other sufficient reason to warrant review - The grounds raised were essentially a re-argument of the merits already considered - Held that review cannot be treated as an appeal in disguise (Paras 1-20). B) Criminal Law - Rarest of Rare Cases - Death Sentence - The Court had earlier confirmed death sentence for rape and murder of two children aged 10 and 7 years - The crime was held to be cold-blooded, heinous, and involving rape of a minor girl and murder of two children - No remorse shown by the petitioner - Held that the case falls within the rarest of rare category justifying death penalty (Paras 13-15). C) Evidence Act, 1872 - Section 27 - Recovery of Articles - The petitioner made a disclosure statement leading to recovery of the lunch box of one of the victims from his house - Such recovery was used as corroborative evidence - Held that the recovery was admissible under Section 27 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 (Para 9). D) Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 - Section 164 - Confessional Statement - The petitioner's confessional statement under Section 164 CrPC was considered - The Court observed that the mere making of a confessional statement does not, on the facts of this case, indicate remorse - Held that the confession was voluntary and could be relied upon (Paras 12, 15). E) Criminal Law - Circumstantial Evidence - Last Seen Theory - The prosecution established that the children were last seen in the company of the accused persons - This, coupled with medical evidence of rape and drowning, DNA evidence, and recovery of articles, formed a complete chain of circumstances pointing to the guilt of the petitioner - Held that the circumstantial evidence was sufficient to sustain conviction (Paras 2-12).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the review petition discloses any error apparent on the face of the record or any other sufficient reason to warrant review of the judgment dated 01.08.2019 affirming conviction and death sentence.
Final Decision
The review petitions are dismissed. The judgment dated 01.08.2019 affirming conviction and death sentence stands confirmed.
Law Points
- Review petition limited to error apparent on record
- not re-appreciation of evidence
- Death sentence confirmed in rarest of rare cases
- Circumstantial evidence including last seen theory
- DNA
- and medical evidence sufficient for conviction
- Confessional statement under Section 164 CrPC not indicative of remorse
- No review ground made out.
