Supreme Court saves triple murderer from gallows

NEW DELHI: The death sentence given to a constable for murdering three people has been commuted to life imprisonment by the Supreme Court, which observed that he shot the victims only once while inebriated.

"Each of the victims was shot at only once. The repeated firing by the appellant is an over-reaction of an inebriated brain to a petty issue," a bench of Justices R V Raveendran and B Sudershan Reddy said while altering the death sentence imposed on constable Des Raj.

However, the apex court pointed out that drunkenness cannot be an excuse for any brutal or diabolic act.

Hence, it said the conviction for the triple murder was valid but the death penalty has to be altered to life imprisonment as the offence did not meet the requirement of "rarest of rare" cases to warrant capital punishment.

Des Raj, a constable with Punjab Police, shot dead his neighbours Manjit Kaur, Bhagwan Singh and Lal Singh after they objected to the dumping of garbage in front of their house by the policeman's family.

Three others -- Chand Singh (Manjit Kaur's husband), his nephew Tarlok Singh and a child named Raveena -- suffered injuries in the firing.

According to the prosecution, an inebriated Des Raj loaded his gun twice to carry out the killings and was goaded by his family to finish off the victims.

A sessions court sentenced the constable to death while acquitting his family members for the killings. The High Court affirmed the sentence after noting that he had repeatedly fired at the victims "in order to silence the voice of genuine protests".

The High Court noted that the "gruesome, unscrupulous and diabolic attack on unarmed and innocent men, woman and child was committed in a cold-blooded manner by a person who had been trained to protect the life and liberty of the people".

In an appeal before the Supreme Court, Des Raj argued that the offence committed by him did not invite capital punishment.

Agreeing with his argument, the apex court, after interpreting various earlier judgements, reasoned that Des Raj was not a hardcore criminal or an anti-social or anti-national.

"This is not a murder to satisfy any greed or lust. This is not a case involving cruelty or torture of the victims.

This is not a case where the act is brutal, diabolic or revolting," the apex court observed.

According to the Supreme Court, the repeated loading of the weapon and firing in utter disregard for life, in the circumstances, was not an indication of extreme depravity or brutality but of a drunken rage.

Hence, it said that Des Raj did not deserve the death sentence as the ends of justice could be achieved by altering his punishment to life imprisonment.

The leaders of political parties have been reminded that the special session of Lok Sabha in 1997, held to commemorate the golden jubilee of independence, had stressed the need to strictly ensure the orderly conduct of business.

A resolution unanimously adopted by the Lok Sabha had said the prestige of Parliament should be preserved by maintaining the inviolability of Question Hour and by refraining from transgressions into the official areas of the House or from shouting slogans.

As Question Hour continued to be derailed for days together during the current monsoon session, the Speaker made a special mention of the matter and reminded the MPs that it had been decided that Question Hour would not be disturbed.

The Question Hour provides prime time to members to seek information and ensure the accountability of the government and hence there was consensus that demands to suspend Question Hour should be discouraged.

A significant step in the 14th Lok Sabha was the convening of a meeting in 2004 wherein it was agreed to strive to uphold the dignity and decorum of the House so that people did not lose their faith in the efficacy of parliamentary democracy.

But despite various initiates, frequent disruptions continue, the Speaker told leaders belonging to the entire political spectrum.