JUDGMENT : R.Mukhopadhyay, J. 1. Heard Mr. Sabyasanchi, learned counsel for the appellant and Mrs. Priya Shrestha, Learned Special P.P. 2. This appeal is directed against the judgment and order of conviction and sentence dated 31.01.2018 (sentence passed on 12.02.2018) passed by Sri Shiv Pal Singh, learned Additional Judicial Commissioner-I, Ranchi in S.T. No. 33/2015, whereby and whereunder the appellant has been convicted for the offence under Section 376(2)(i), 302 and 201 of IPC and Section 6 of the POCSO Act, 2012 and has been sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for life along with a fine of Rs.10,000/- for the offence under Section 6 of POCSO Act, five years imprisonment along with a fine of Rs.5,000/- for the offence under Section 201 of I.P.C., rigorous imprisonment for life along with a fine of Rs.10,000/- for the offence under Section 376 of I.P.C. and has been sentenced to death for the offence under Section 302 of I.P.C. 3. The prosecution case arises out of the Fardbayan of Mashi Das Toppo recorded on 20.03.2014 in which it has been stated that the informant is at present staying at Khadgarha Bhuinyatoli for the last 12-14 years by constructing a house along with his wife and children. The informant works as a Khalasi in Sanju Bus. It has been alleged that on 19.03.2014 at around 7.00 pm the informant was having a quarrel with his wife and his daughter victim ‘X’ was also present. After the quarrel ended the informant, his wife and children went to sleep but victim ‘X’ could not be found. The informant had searched for his daughter who could not be traced out at which the informant had thought that she might have gone to the house of Manik Garari in the vicinity. In the morning there was a commotion that the dead body of a child was found lying in Kantatoli graveyard. When the informant and his wife went to the said place they could recognize the dead body to be that of their daughter victim ‘X’ and it was found that the face and head was crushed with a stone. Based on the aforesaid allegations Lower Bazaar P.S. Case No. 73 of 2014 was instituted against unknown for the offences under Sections 302, 376 and 201 IPC and Section 6 of the POCSO Act. Based on the aforesaid allegations Lower Bazaar P.S. Case No. 73 of 2014 was instituted against unknown for the offences under Sections 302, 376 and 201 IPC and Section 6 of the POCSO Act. On conclusion of investigation charge sheet was submitted against the accused Gandhi Oraon for the offences under Sections 376, 302 and 201 IPC and Section 6 of the POCSO Act and after cognizance was taken the case was committed to the Court of Sessions. Charge was framed under Sections 376(2)(i), 302 and 201 IPC and Section 6 POCSO Act against the accused which was read over and explained to him in Hindi to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. 4. The prosecution has examined as many as 14 witnesses in support of its case. 5. P.W.1 Sudha Toppo is the mother of the victim ‘X’ who has stated that the incident is of 1 year 4 months back at around 7.00-8.00pm when she and her husband were having some difference of opinion. Her daughter victim ‘X’, Diya, Neha and son Mahanand were present. Her brother-in-law Dinesh was also present and so was Gandhi Oraon. After the quarrel ended, she could not find her daughter victim ‘X’ in spite of searching for her. She had thought that Gandhi Oraon had taken away her daughter on the pretext of giving her toffee.In the morning she learnt that a dead body was found lying in the graveyard and when she went to the said place she found the dead body to be that of her daughter. Her head was crushed with a stone and her pant and frock were smeared with blood. The police had already reached the place of occurrence. In her cross-examination she has stated that she does not know where Gandhi Oraon stays. She knows him because he used to work with her husband as a khalasi. She had not seen Gandhi Oraon giving toffee to her daughter victim ‘X’. 6. P.W.2 Masi Das Toppo is the informant who has stated that the incident is of one year four months back at around 8.00 p.m. when he was having a quarrel with his wife Sudha Toppo. At that point of time in his house Gandhi Oraon, victim ‘X’ aged 8 years, Diya Toppo, son Mahanand Toppo and daughter Neha were present. P.W.2 Masi Das Toppo is the informant who has stated that the incident is of one year four months back at around 8.00 p.m. when he was having a quarrel with his wife Sudha Toppo. At that point of time in his house Gandhi Oraon, victim ‘X’ aged 8 years, Diya Toppo, son Mahanand Toppo and daughter Neha were present. Gandhi Oraon had offered victim ‘X’ some snacks and both went away. When his daughter victim ‘X’ did not come back at night he started searching for her and in the meantime he came to know that the dead body of a girl has been found lying in the graveyard. When he went to the graveyard he found the dead body to be that of his daughter whose head was crushed with a stone and her pant was open from one leg. There was presence of blood in her clothes. The police had already reached at the place of occurrence. When the police had apprehended Gandhi Oraon he had admitted to have committed rape upon victim ‘X’. When the victim threatened of disclosing the incident to her parents, he had crushed her head with a stone. The police had recorded his statement in which he had signed and Md. Ejaz @ Bhondu had also signed and the same has been proved and marked as Exhibit-1. In cross-examination he has stated that Gandhi Oraon had worked with him as Khalasi and he stays somewhere in Ratu Road. Initially he used to work as a Khalasi along with Gandhi Oraon in Bajrang Bus which used to run from Ranchi to Pakur. After working for 3-4 years they had left their jobs and had taken up different assignments but Gandhi Oraon used to frequently visit his house. On the date of occurrence he was quarrelling with his wife. Gandhi Oraon was on leave on that day. 7. P.W.3 Gop Toppo has stated that he works as a gardener in Kantatoli and he had come to know that a girl has been raped and murdered. 8. P.W.4 Raj Kumar Nagvanshi has stated that he had also gone to see the dead body since he was a member of the Church Committee. Her head was crushed and there were injuries on her private parts. 9. 8. P.W.4 Raj Kumar Nagvanshi has stated that he had also gone to see the dead body since he was a member of the Church Committee. Her head was crushed and there were injuries on her private parts. 9. P.W.5 Praveen Dadel has stated that he is a member of the Church Committee and when he got the news he had gone and seen the dead body of a girl. The girl was identified. In cross-examination he has deposed that he does not know about the occurrence. 10. P.W.6 Md.Ejaz @ Bhondu has stated that he works at Khadgarha bus stand and he had heard that a girl has been murdered and a dead body has been thrown in the graveyard at which he had gone and seen the dead body. This witness has been declared hostile by the prosecution. 11. P.W.7 Dr. Ajit Kumar Chaudhary was the Head of the Department of FMT, RIMS, Ranchi and Dr. Md. Mukhtar Naved who was a junior resident non-academic was working under him. On 20.03.2014 Dr. Md. Mukhtar Naved had conducted autopsy on the dead body of victim ‘X’ under his supervision and the following anti-mortem injuries were found on the person of the deceased:- (i) Two abrasions, one of size 7 cm x 3 cm on left side of forehead and the another 4 x 2 cm over left cheek. (ii) Three lacerated wounds, one of size 7 cm x 2 cm into bone deep over left frontal region of head, second of size 1 cm x ½ cm into soft tissue over left eyebrow and the third one was of the vagina and hymen. Vagina & hymen both were teared and position of teared was of 6 O’clock with laceration of surrounding soft tissue and presence of blood and blood clots into the vaginal canal. There was contusion of wall of uterus as well. The cause of death was opined to be on account of the above noted injuries which were anti-mortem in nature and were caused by hard and blunt substance. Two slides from vaginal swab of the deceased were prepared and were sent to pathological lab of RIMS, Ranchi for detection of sperms. He has proved the post-mortem report which has been marked as Exhibit-P.W.7/A. The symptoms and the findings are suggestive of sexual assault as well to the deceased. 12. Two slides from vaginal swab of the deceased were prepared and were sent to pathological lab of RIMS, Ranchi for detection of sperms. He has proved the post-mortem report which has been marked as Exhibit-P.W.7/A. The symptoms and the findings are suggestive of sexual assault as well to the deceased. 12. P.W.8 Sarju Kumar Rai is a security guard whose house is near Khadgarha bus stand. He has stated that on 20.03.2014 at around 12.30 pm he was at Khadgarha bus stand when he heard some commotion coming from the graveyard and when he went to the graveyard he found the dead body of a girl with blood splashed around the body and a big blood stained stone also lying beside her. The police had come and so had the family members of the deceased victim. He had come to know about the name of the deceased girl. The police had seized the blood near the body as well as the blood stained stone and had prepared a seizure list in which he had put his signature and which has been marked as Exhibit-8/A. The police had also seized the red frock and the panty of the deceased from which also a seizure list was prepared in which he had put his signature which has been marked as Exhibit-P.W.8/B. He claims to identify the seized stone, frock and the panty. 13. P.W.9 Bharat Kumar has stated that he works in an NGO named Rashtramandal Youth Samadhi and stays at Tamtam Toli. The office is situated at Kanta Toli near the graveyard. About 4-5 years back when he had come to attend to his duty at Kanta Toli he had seen a crowd which had gathered at the graveyard. On enquiry from the persons present he came to know that the dead body of a child has been found. He did not have any knowledge about the identification of the child. 14. P.W.10 Dr. Hridesh Kumar Sinha was posted at State Forensic Science Laboratory from 07.07.1981 to 30.07.2017.He had prepared the forensic report in connection with Lower Bazaar P.S. Case No. 73/2014. He did not have any knowledge about the identification of the child. 14. P.W.10 Dr. Hridesh Kumar Sinha was posted at State Forensic Science Laboratory from 07.07.1981 to 30.07.2017.He had prepared the forensic report in connection with Lower Bazaar P.S. Case No. 73/2014. He had received the material relating to the case on 01.04.2014 from special messenger P/27 Arun Kumar Singh and the sealed carton contained 4 paper envelopes marked A, B, C and Z and 5 cloth packets marked D, E, F, G and H. He has proved the FSL report which has been marked as P.W.10/P. In cross-examination he has deposed that in the exhibits marked E, F, G and H which is a frock, under-pant, jeans and a vest no semen was detected on biological test being conducted upon them. 15. P.W.11 Mukesh Ram has stated that the incident is of March 2014. The house of the informant is adjacent to his house. The accused and the informant were good friends. There was regular conversation between the accused and the daughter of the informant. He has stated that the victim ‘X’ was allured by the accused and thereafter she was raped and murdered. The CCTV indicated that the accused was taking away the child. The accused had fled away and after 3-4 days he was apprehended by the police while going to Kolkata. The accused had confessed in his presence as well as in the presence of the informant that he had committed a mistake. On his confession police had recovered a blood-stained jeans and Ganji. A seizure list was prepared in which he had put his signature which has been identified by him and which has been marked as Exhibit-P.W.11/A. 16. P.W.12 Binay Kumar Singh was posted as an Officer- in-charge in Lower Bazar P.S. and on 19.03.2014 on the basis of a rumour floating around he had reached Kantatoli graveyard where the dead body of a girl was found lying. The persons who had gathered, had disclosed the name of the child. The Fardbayan of Masi Das Toppo was registered by the Sub- Inspector Roop Singh Baraik. The persons who had gathered, had disclosed the name of the child. The Fardbayan of Masi Das Toppo was registered by the Sub- Inspector Roop Singh Baraik. The endorsement in the Fardbayan is in his handwriting which has been proved and marked as Exhibit-12/A. He has also proved the formal FIR which has been marked as Exhibit-12/B. He has proved the inquest report which has been prepared by Roop Singh Baraik and which has been marked as Exhibit-12/C. The dead body was sent to RIMS, Ranchi for post-mortem. He had gone to RIMS, Ranchi and he had prepared the seizure list of a red coloured blood and semen stained frock and a cream coloured panty. The seizure list is in his handwriting and bears his signature which has been proved and marked as Exhibit-12/D. He had recorded the restatement of the informant and thereafter proceeded to the place of occurrence which is the graveyard of CNI Church. He had seized blood stained leaves marked A, blood stained leaf marked B, blood stains on the wall which has been rubbed with cotton marked C, blood smeared stone marked D and a seizure list was duly prepared. The seizure list is in his handwriting and bears his signature which has been proved and marked as Exhibit- 12/E. He had recorded the statements of the witnesses Raj Kumar Nagvanshi, Hitesh Panna, Emanuel Herenge, Sudha Toppo, Md.Ejaz @ Bhondu, Jitu Ram, Dinesh Singh, Suraj Kumar Ram, Rajendra Tiwari, Gop Toppo and Bharat Kumar. Gandhi Oraon was apprehended by Saraikela Police while he was going to Kolkata and after taking his custody he was taken to Ranchi and on the way he had confessed of being involved in the murder. He was kept in the lockup but on the next morning it was informed that Gandhi Oraon had hoodwinked the duty officer and had escaped from the lockup. A separate case being Lower Bazar P.S. Case No. 75/2014 was instituted against Gandhi Oraon. On 23.03.2014 information was received that Gandhi Oraon was sighted in South Point Police Station area in Kolkata and on an information given the South Point police had apprehended Gandhi Oraon. He was brought back to Ranchi on transit remand. A separate case being Lower Bazar P.S. Case No. 75/2014 was instituted against Gandhi Oraon. On 23.03.2014 information was received that Gandhi Oraon was sighted in South Point Police Station area in Kolkata and on an information given the South Point police had apprehended Gandhi Oraon. He was brought back to Ranchi on transit remand. On 24.03.2014 the confessional statement of Gandhi Oraon was recorded which has been proved and marked as Exhibit-12/F. On his confessional statement in the bushes besides Kanchan Hotel, a sky-coloured old jeans stained with blood and semen was recovered along with a vest stained with blood and semen like substance were also recovered which were seized and a seizure list was prepared which has been proved and marked as Exhibit-P.W.12/G. The medical examination report of the accused was obtained from the doctor which has been proved and marked as Exhibit-12/H. On 28.03.2014 he had obtained the sample of blood for DNA profiling which has been marked I. The post-mortem report of victim ‘X’ was also obtained. On conclusion of investigation, charge sheet was submitted against Gandhi Oraon for the offences punishable under Sections 302, 201, 376 of IPC and Section 6 of POCSO Act. In his cross-examination he has stated that the parents of the deceased had not lodged any Sanha regarding their daughter having become traceless. In course of investigation not a single eyewitness could be found. He had not recorded the statement of the owner of Kanchan Hotel. In the confessional statement the accused had put his thumb impression but his name was not mentioned in the same. 17. P.W.13 Nisar Ahmed has stated that he was the driver of White Horse Bus and the bus travels between Ranchi and Kolkata. The accused was working as a Khalasi in the said bus. When he and the others were having meal at Chandil Line Hotel, the police had arrived and gave a direction not to start the bus without the permission of the police. The accused was caught by the police who left with him to Ranchi while he had driven his bus to Kolkata. When in the third day he returned to Ranchi he came to know that the accused had raped and murdered a girl. In cross-examination he has stated that the accused was honest and everyone appreciated his behavior. 18. P.W.14 Dr. When in the third day he returned to Ranchi he came to know that the accused had raped and murdered a girl. In cross-examination he has stated that the accused was honest and everyone appreciated his behavior. 18. P.W.14 Dr. Kumar Gaurav has stated that the injury report of the accused was prepared in his unit and the following injuries were found: (i) Penis: Whitish dry skin of the penis with 0.5x0.5 cm indurated ulcer, painless over the shaft, present healed abrasion mark – 2 cm x 2 cm in right forearm. (ii) No any visual external injuries noted throughout the body. (iii) Refer to forensic department for age estimation and DNA profile. He had signed the injury report as well as Dr. Shaketan Bhagat had signed on the same and which has been marked as Exhibit-P.W.14/1. In cross-examination he has deposed that the penis of the appellant was dry and there was nothing else in the penis except ulcer. 19. The statement of the accused was recorded under Section 313 CrPC in which he has denied his complicity in the commission of rape and murder of victim ‘X’. 20. Mr. Sabyasanchi, learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that admittedly there are no eyewitnesses to the occurrence and only on the basis of circumstantial evidence the appellant has been convicted. It has been submitted that the wearing apparels of the appellant were also subjected to chemical examination but no blood or semen were found on the same. Learned counsel submits that in absence of any eyewitness motive plays an important part and from the evidence of the witnesses it transpires that there was a cordial relationship between the appellant and the informant and the appellant used to frequent the house of the informant. Learned counsel has referred to the evidence of P.W. 13 who is the driver of a bus in which the appellant was working as a Khalasi and he has stated about the appellant being honest and everyone was appreciative of the nature of the appellant. 21. Mrs. Priya Shrestha, learned Spl.P.P has submitted that the circumstances clearly indicate that it was the appellant who had committed the rape of the daughter of the informant and had crushed her head with a stone which resulted in her death. 21. Mrs. Priya Shrestha, learned Spl.P.P has submitted that the circumstances clearly indicate that it was the appellant who had committed the rape of the daughter of the informant and had crushed her head with a stone which resulted in her death. It has been submitted that the deceased was last seen with the appellant in the evening and the close proximity of the early recovery of the dead body would clearly be indicative of the fact that it was the appellant who was instrumental in committing rape and murder of the victim ‘X’. Learned Spl.P.P has also submitted that the appellant had confessed and the FSL report also clearly reveals about the appellant having committed rape upon the victim. 22. We have heard the learned counsel for the respective parties and have also perused the trial court record. 23. The incident had occurred in the evening of 19.03.2014 when the informant and his wife were quarreling and the victim ‘X’ was also present but subsequently when peace was restored, the victim could not be found after which a search was made and in the next morning on hearing that a dead body of a child has been located in the graveyard, the informant and his wife had gone to the said place and had identified the dead body to be that of their daughter. It is no doubt true that there are no eyewitnesses to the occurrence but at the same time it can be discerned that the appellant was present in the house of the informant at the time when the victim had become traceless and he was seen in the CCTV footage as accompanying the victim. The evidence of P.W.1 and P.W.2 who are the parents of the victim clearly reveal about the cordial relationship which was existing and no suspicion was cast when P.W.1 had thought that perhaps the appellant had taken her daughter for giving her toffees.The evidence of P.W.1 and P.W.2 reveals about the trust which they had over the appellant as at one point of time P.W.2 and the appellant worked as a Khalasi at the same place. The involvement of the appellant further stems from the FSL report in which the generated DNA profiling of the appellant and the victim ‘X’ had matched. The involvement of the appellant further stems from the FSL report in which the generated DNA profiling of the appellant and the victim ‘X’ had matched. The conduct of the appellant would also be an incriminating circumstance against the appellant as the appellant was apprehended from Chandil and after he was arrested and put in a lockup he had managed to escape and subsequently he was once again nabbed in the city of Kolkata. The entire circumstances borne out from the oral as well as documentary evidence clearly depicts that it was the appellant who was involved in committing rape upon victim ‘X’ and thereafter ending her life by smashing her face with a stone. The learned trial court has considered the evidence in its proper perspective and has rightly convicted the appellant for the offences under Sections 302, 376 and 201 of the I.P.C and Section 6 of the POCSO Act. 24. We do not find any reason to interfere with the order of conviction passed by the learned trial court against the appellant and therefore we affirm the same. 25. So far as the sentence imposed upon the appellant is concerned, submission has been advanced by Mr. Sabyasanchi, learned counsel for the appellant that in a case of circumstantial evidence the sentence of death would be too harsh upon a convict.It has been submitted that the appellant is a young person who in his job as a Khalasi was honest and dedicated as could be deciphered from the evidence of P.W.13 and therefore the sentence imposed upon the appellant be suitably modified. 26. Mrs. Priya Shrestha, learned Spl.P.P has submitted that the heinous act committed by the appellant deserves capital punishment as apart from snuffing out the life of a child, he had also subjected her to brutal rape, the post-mortem report and the FSL report being a testimony to such brutality. 27. In the case of Deen Dayal Tiwari versus State of Uttar Pradesh reported in 2025 SCC online SC 237, the mitigating and aggravating circumstances have been delineated and the same reads as under:- “19. Aggravating Factors 19.1 Brutal multiple murders: The Appellant has been found guilty of murdering five persons—his own wife and four minor daughters. This crime, by its very nature, is undeniably grave and horrific. Aggravating Factors 19.1 Brutal multiple murders: The Appellant has been found guilty of murdering five persons—his own wife and four minor daughters. This crime, by its very nature, is undeniably grave and horrific. 19.2 Position of trust and vulnerability of victims: The deceased were defenseless, particularly the four minor daughters, placing a moral onus on the Appellant to protect them. Instead, they were brutally killed in their own home. 19.3 Impact on societal conscience: Undeniably, such a crime of multiple homicides within a family can shock the collective conscience of the society. 20. Mitigating Factors 20.1 Absence of previous criminal antecedents: The record does not disclose any prior conviction or past criminal history on the part of the Appellant. 20.2 Reports suggesting scope for reformation: In compliance with our directions, the State has placed on record the report of the Superintendent of District Jail, Ayodhya. It indicates that the Appellant's behavior in custody has been “satisfactory” and “normal,” noting that he has been performing assigned duties (such as cleaning/sweeper tasks) without any adverse conduct. While prison conduct alone is not determinative, it is a factor supportive of the possibility of reformation. 20.3 Socio-economic and personal circumstances: Nothing on record suggests that the Appellant is incapable of rehabilitation. He does not appear to be a hardened criminal who poses an enduring menace to society. 20.4 Possibility of commutation- In several cases involving multiple homicides, this Court has nonetheless commuted the death penalty to life imprisonment, acknowledging the potential for reformation or considering other mitigating factors. In State of Uttar Pradesh v. Krishna Master, (2010) 12 SCC 324 , the accused wiped out almost an entire family, six persons on the ground of saving “honour.” Despite the heinous nature of the crime, this Court commuted the death sentence to rigorous imprisonment for life along with a fine. Similarly, in Prakash Dhawal Khairnar (Patil) v. State of Maharashtra, (2002) 2 SCC 35 , the Appellant therein had annihilated his brother's entire family, but this Court held that although the crime was heinous, it could not be classified as ‘rarest of rare.’ It was emphasized that there existed a possibility of reforming the offender.” 28. In Machhi Singh v. State of Punjab reported in (1983) 3 SCC 470 , it has been held as follows: “32. In Machhi Singh v. State of Punjab reported in (1983) 3 SCC 470 , it has been held as follows: “32. The reasons why the community as a whole does not endorse the humanistic approach reflected in “death sentence-in-no-case” doctrine are not far to seek. In the first place, the very humanistic edifice is constructed on the foundation of “reverence for life” principle. When a member of the community violates this very principle by killing another member, the society may not feel itself bound by the shackles of this doctrine. Secondly, it has to be realized that every member of the community is able to live with safety without his or her own life being endangered because of the protective arm of the community and on account of the rule of law enforced by it. The very existence of the rule of law and the fear of being brought to book operates as a deterrent for those who have no scruples in killing others if it suits their ends. Every member of the community owes a debt to the community for this protection. When ingratitude is shown instead of gratitude by “killing” a member of the community which protects the murderer himself from being killed, or when the community feels that for the sake of self-preservation the killer has to be killed, the community may well withdraw the protection by sanctioning the death penalty. But the community will not do so in every case. It may do so “in rarest of rare cases” when its collective conscience is so shocked that it will expect the holders of the judicial power centre to inflict death penalty irrespective of their personal opinion as regards desirability or otherwise of retaining death penalty. The community may entertain such a sentiment when the crime is viewed from the platform of the motive for, or the manner of commission of the crime, or the anti-social or abhorrent nature of the crime, such as for instance: I. Manner of commission of murder 33. When the murder is committed in an extremely brutal, grotesque, diabolical, revolting or dastardly manner so as to arouse intense and extreme indignation of the community. For instance, (i) when the house of the victim is set aflame with the end in view to roast him alive in the house. When the murder is committed in an extremely brutal, grotesque, diabolical, revolting or dastardly manner so as to arouse intense and extreme indignation of the community. For instance, (i) when the house of the victim is set aflame with the end in view to roast him alive in the house. (ii) when the victim is subjected to inhuman acts of torture or cruelty in order to bring about his or her death. (iii) when the body of the victim is cut into pieces or his body is dismembered in a fiendish manner. II. Motive for commission of murder 34. When the murder is committed for a motive which evinces total depravity and meanness. For instance when (a) a hired assassin commits murder for the sake of money or reward (b) a cold-blooded murder is committed with a deliberate design in order to inherit property or to gain control over property of a ward or a person under the control of the murderer or vis-a-vis whom the murderer is in a dominating position or in a position of trust, or (c) a murder is committed in the course for betrayal of the motherland. III. Anti-social or socially abhorrent nature of the crime 35. (a) When murder of a member of a Scheduled Caste or minority community etc., is committed not for personal reasons but in circumstances which arouse social wrath. For instance when such a crime is committed in order to terrorize such persons and frighten them into fleeing from a place or in order to deprive them of, or make them surrender, lands or benefits conferred on them with a view to reverse past injustices and in order to restore the social balance. (b) In cases of “bride burning” and what are known as “dowry deaths” or when murder is committed in order to remarry for the sake of extracting dowry once again or to marry another woman on account of infatuation. IV. Magnitude of crime 36. When the crime is enormous in proportion. For instance when multiple murders say of all or almost all the members of a family or a large number of persons of a particular caste, community, or locality, are committed. V. Personality of victim of murder 37. IV. Magnitude of crime 36. When the crime is enormous in proportion. For instance when multiple murders say of all or almost all the members of a family or a large number of persons of a particular caste, community, or locality, are committed. V. Personality of victim of murder 37. When the victim of murder is (a) an innocent child who could not have or has not provided even an excuse, much less a provocation, for murder (b) a helpless woman or a person rendered helpless by old age or infirmity (c) when the victim is a person vis-a-vis whom the murderer is in a position of domination or trust (d) when the victim is a public figure generally loved and respected by the community for the services rendered by him and the murder is committed for political or similar reasons other than personal reasons. 38. In this background the guidelines indicated in Bachan Singh case will have to be culled out and applied to the facts of each individual case where the question of imposing of death sentence arises. The following propositions emerge from Bachan Singh case: “(i) The extreme penalty of death need not be inflicted except in gravest cases of extreme culpability. (ii) Before opting for the death penalty the circumstances of the ‘offender’ also require to be taken into consideration along with the circumstances of the ‘crime’. (iii) Life imprisonment is the rule and death sentence is an exception. In other words death sentence must be imposed only when life imprisonment appears to be an altogether inadequate punishment having regard to the relevant circumstances of the crime, and provided, and only provided, the option to impose sentence of imprisonment for life cannot be conscientiously exercised having regard to the nature and circumstances of the crime and all the relevant circumstances. (iv) A balance sheet of aggravating and mitigating circumstances has to be drawn up and in doing so the mitigating circumstances have to be accorded full weightage and a just balance has to be struck between the aggravating and the mitigating circumstances before the option is exercised. 39. In order to apply these guidelines inter alia the following questions may be asked and answered: (a) Is there something uncommon about the crime which renders sentence of imprisonment for life inadequate and calls for a death sentence? 39. In order to apply these guidelines inter alia the following questions may be asked and answered: (a) Is there something uncommon about the crime which renders sentence of imprisonment for life inadequate and calls for a death sentence? (b) Are the circumstances of the crime such that there is no alternative but to impose death sentence even after according maximum weightage to the mitigating circumstances which speak in favour of the offender?” 29. In the present case there is no doubt about the fact that it was the appellant who was responsible for committing the rape and murder of the victim ‘X’ and consequently the conviction has been upheld by us. The mitigating circumstances would indicate that the appellant is a young person and the appellant does not have any criminal antecedent. The appellant has remained in custody since long and there is nothing on record to suggest that the appellant cannot be reformed and rehabilitated. It is no doubt true that the offence which has been committed by the appellant is a dastardly crime but that by itself would not invite a sentence of death when the mitigating circumstances outweighs the aggravating circumstances considering the age as well as chances of reformation of the appellant and absence of any criminal antecedents. The case of the present appellant would not come within the category of rarest of rare cases and therefore we hereby commute the death sentence to rigorous imprisonment for life. The reference is accordingly answered and consequently Cr. Appeal (DB) No. 530 of 2018 is dismissed with the modification in the sentence imposed upon the appellant. 30. Pending interlocutory application, if any, stands closed.