DEHRADUN: The Uttarakhand High Court has directed the state government to examine and place before it the records relating to a death-row convict sentenced for the brutal murder of his mother, elder brother and pregnant sister-in-law in Tehri Garhwal.
A division bench of Justices Ravindra Maithani and Siddhartha Sah continued hearing the death reference and the appeal filed by convict Sanjay Singh, and fixed July 21 as the next date of hearing.
The bench directed the state to scrutinise the material relating to the convict and clarify whether he was suffering from any serious illness at the time of the incident, and whether the crime was committed in a fit of rage.
The case relates to a gruesome incident on December 13, 2014, in Gumal village of Tehri Garhwal. According to the prosecution, Sanjay Singh killed his mother, elder brother and pregnant sister-in-law with a sword following a minor dispute. His father, Ram Singh Panwar, had lodged the FIR.
In August 2021, the District and Sessions Court in Tehri Garhwal convicted Sanjay Singh and sentenced him to death. He subsequently challenged the verdict before the High Court.
During the proceedings, the High Court had earlier remitted the matter to the trial court for reconsideration on the limited question of the convict's medical condition and its bearing on the death sentence.
After rehearing the matter, the trial court found the convict to be medically fit and reaffirmed the death sentence. It observed that he deserved capital punishment, noting that he had "brutally killed three persons with a sword, including an unborn child in the womb of his pregnant sister-in-law."
The High Court had appointed senior advocate Arvind Vashishth as amicus curiae to assist the court and represent the convict.
The amicus curiae submitted that the convict was mentally unwell and that the medical board had also indicated mental illness. He argued that the convict was not in a position to understand the consequences of his actions at the relevant time.
"The medical board has opined that he is mentally ill and may recover after treatment," the amicus curiae told the court, contending that the trial court had overlooked this crucial aspect while reaffirming the death sentence.
The High Court will now examine the state's response and the relevant records before proceeding further in the matter.
