Nainital, Oct 15 The Uttarakhand High Court on Thursday set aside the death sentence awarded by a trial court to a man convicted of brutally killing his mother, elder brother and pregnant sister-in-law with a sword.
A Division Bench of Justice Ravindra Maithani and Justice Siddhartha Sah, after hearing the matter, quashed the death sentence and directed the state government to provide the convict with appropriate treatment for his mental illness and release him after he recovers. The High Court had earlier reserved its judgment in the matter.
During the proceedings, the High Court had asked the government to examine the records relating to the convict and ascertain whether he was suffering from any serious mental illness at the time of the incident. The High Court had also sought to determine whether any relevant fact concerning his mental condition had been overlooked while awarding the death sentence.
As per the case, Sanjay Singh, a resident of Gumal village in Tehri Garhwal, killed his mother, elder brother and pregnant sister-in-law with a sword on December 13, 2014, following a dispute over a minor issue. His father, Ram Singh Pawar, lodged the report in connection with the incident.
In August 2021, the court of Additional District and Sessions Judge Rama Pandey convicted Sanjay Singh and sentenced him to death. The convict subsequently challenged the judgment before the High Court.
The High Court appointed Senior Advocate Arvind Vashisth as amicus curiae to represent the convict. The amicus informed the High Court that the death-row convict was suffering from mental illness. A medical board had also found him to be mentally ill and stated that he was unable to understand the consequences of his actions, although his condition was treatable and he could recover with appropriate medical treatment.
It was contended that the trial court had overlooked this crucial aspect while awarding the death sentence. The High Court has now set aside the capital punishment and directed the government to ensure his mental-health treatment and release him after recovery.
Earlier, the High Court had remitted the reference back to the trial court for reconsideration. The trial court, however, had held that there was no material to establish that the convict was suffering from any illness at the time and maintained that there was no ground to modify its earlier order.
