1

NON-REPORTABLE

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

REVIEW PETITION (CRIMINAL) NO. 324 OF 2015 IN

SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CRIMINAL) NO. 111 OF 2015

JITENDRA @ JEETU .....PETITIONER(S)

VERSUS

STATE  OF  MADHYA  PRADESH  & OTHERS

.....RESPONDENT(S)

J U D G M E N T

A.K. SIKRI, J.

This  Review  Petition  is  filed  seeking  review  of  orders  dated

January 06, 2015 whereby Special Leave Petition (Crl.) No. 111  of 2015

@ D35737 of 2014 filed by the review petitioner and his co-accused was

dismissed in limine with one word ‘dismissed’.

2. First Information Report No. 513 of 2012 was registered under Sections

363, 376(2)(g), 201 and 302 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) wherein the

petitioner and his two co-accused were implicated. They were arrested

on June 26, 2012. After the investigation was complete, charge-sheet

2

was filed and charges framed under the aforesaid provisions. Since the

review petitioner  and his  co-accused persons pleaded not  guilty, the

prosecution  led  evidence  in  support  of  the  aforesaid  charges.   The

Additional Sessions Judge, Indore vide judgment dated April 26, 2013

convicted  the  two  accused  persons  under  Sections  363,  376(2)(f),

376(2)(g), 201 and 302, IPC.  They were awarded 7 years’  rigorous

imprisonment (RI) each for offences under Sections 363 and 201, life

imprisonment each for Section 376(2)(f) and (g) and sentence to death

under Section 302, IPC.

3. Since death sentence was awarded, Reference was made to the High

Court.  Both the convicted persons also challenged their conviction by

filing a common appeal in the High Court.  The said appeal as well as

the criminal reference were heard together by the High Court.  The High

Court, by its judgment dated August 21, 2014, affirmed the conviction as

well as death sentence awarded to the accused persons.

4. The  review petitioner  along  with  co-accused  persons  challenged  the

said judgment of the High Court and filed Special Leave Petition (Crl.)

No. 111 of 2015 (@ D35737 of 2014) which was dismissed in limine on

January 06, 2015, as pointed out above. However, the review petition

against the order dated January 06, 2015 is filed by only one person,

i.e., the review petitioner.

3

5. Mr. Grover, learned senior counsel appearing for the review petitioner

has sought review of the said order primarily on two grounds.  In the first

instance, it is submitted that when it was a case of death penalty, the

special leave petition should not have been dismissed without giving any

reasons.  He also submitted that though the review petitioner had initially

approached  the  Secretary,  Supreme  Court  Legal  Service  Committee

(SCLSC) which assigned the case to its panel lawyer who drafted the

special leave petition and filed the same in the Court,  even before it

could come up for hearing, the family of the review petitioner had made

an application dated December 26, 2014 to the Secretary, SCLSC for

withdrawal of the legal aid, as the review petitioner wanted the case to

be presented through his own advocate.  Notwithstanding the same, the

advocate who was assigned the case by SCLSC appeared in the matter

on  January  06,  2015  when  the  special  leave  petition  of  the  review

petitioner and his co-accused persons was dismissed in limine.

6. By orders in Review Petition No. 388 of 2015, where also the special

leave petition was dismissed in identical manner  in limine and without

giving reasons, we have allowed the review, inter alia, on the ground

that in such cases a deeper scrutiny coupled with reasons in support of

death penalty should be given by the Court.  Adopting the reasoning in

the  said  case,  this  review  petition  also  stands  allowed  and  as  a

4

consequence, SLP(Criminal) No. 111 of 2015 is restored to its original

number.  

……………………................J. (A.K. SIKRI)

.............................................J. (ASHOK BHUSHAN)

.............................................J. (INDIRA BANERJEE)

NEW DELHI; NOVEMBER 01, 2018.

5

NON-REPORTABLE

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CRIMINAL APPEAL  NO. 1441    OF 2018 [ARISING OUT OF SLP (CRL.) NO. 111 OF 2015]

JITENDRA @ JEETU .....APPELLANT (S)

VERSUS

STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH & ORS. .....RESPONDENT(S)

J U D G M E N T

A.K. SIKRI, J.

Leave granted.   

2. We have heard the counsel for the parties at length, with their consent.

Insofar as conviction of the appellant is concerned, after perusing the

record and going through the evidence produced against the appellant,

we are of the opinion that it does not call for any interference, in fact,

after some arguments, Mr. Grover did not seriously press the issue of

conviction  and  concentrated  on  the  award  of  death  penalty  to  the

appellants.   Even otherwise, we are convinced that  the conviction is

rightly recorded.

3. Reverting  to  the  issue  of  death  penalty, we have  given  our  serious

thoughts on this aspect.  After examining the matter at length, we are of

the opinion that the instant case would not fall in the category of rarest

6

of  rare  cases  and  it  would  be in  the  interest  of  justice  if  the  death

sentence is commuted into life imprisonment. More so, the appellant

has no history of any other criminal activity, possibility of reform, as the

learned  senior  counsel  for  respondent-State  could  not  point  out

blameworthy conduct depicted by him in jail.  At the same time, we are

also of the opinion that life sentence should be with a cap of 20 years’

rigorous imprisonment (RI) which would mean that the appellant shall

not  be  entitled  to  make  any  representation  for  remission  till  he

completes 20 years of RI.

4. The  appeal  is  partly  allowed  in  the  aforesaid  terms.   Insofar  as

sentences given under Sections 376 and 302, IPC are concerned, those

are  maintained  with  clarification  that  all  the  sentences  shall  run

concurrently.

.............................................J. (A.K. SIKRI)

.............................................J. (ASHOK BHUSHAN)

.............................................J. (INDIRA BANERJEE)

NEW DELHI; NOVEMBER 01, 2018.