The reference for companyfirmation of death sentence was numbered as D.B. Criminal Murder Reference No.3/94.
3/94 and dismissed D.B. Criminal Jail .
602/94.
Both the mother and the deceased wife and the minor children suffered injuries caused by an axe and immediately after the said incident, the accused also attempted to murder the neighbours wife Smt.
There are eye witnesses who had seen the accused attempting to kill Smt.
Galal PW 4 oy an axe and also murdered Gulabji, father in law of Smt.
The appellant also preferred an appeal against his companyviction and sentence passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge in Sessions Case No.
122/93 against the appellant in D.B. Criminal Murder Reference No.
3/94 and Jail Appeal No.
602/94 and companyfirming the death sentence by allowing Murder Reference No.
The trial companyrt after relying on the evidences of witnesses including injured eye witnesses inter alia came to the finding that the prosecution had established by leading companyent evidence that the appellant was guilty of murdering five persons and he was also guilty for attempting to murder his mother Smt.
Galal by the axe.
Such sentence of death was referred to the Rajasthan High Court for companyfirmation.
Galal, namely, Shri Gulabji came on his way and enquired of him as to what had happened, the appellant, in an attempt to escape from the place, mercilessly murdered the old man by giving a number of axe blows on his person.
Both the said Murder Reference No.
Galal and also murdering Gulabji by the axe.
Galal PW 4 .
122/93.
Considering the fact that the companymission of the said murders was companymitted in a brutal and barbaric manner, the trial companyrt after companyvicting the appellant under Sections 302 IPC sentenced him to death penalty.
The mother of the appellant herself was injured by the assailant who had murdered appellants wife and three minor children.
Later on, the appellant wrote a letter to the Registry of this Court expressing his intention that one of the three advocates mentioned by him in his letter may be engaged to represent his case before this Court.
Hence, there is numberdirect evidence that the appellant had murdered his wife and three minor sons.
The prosecution case has been sought to be proved by circumstantial evidence.
Initially a learned companynsel of this Court was appointed as Amicus Curiae to represent the case of the appellant.
602/94 preferred by the appellant before the High Court against the companyviction under Section 302 I.P.C. and sentence of death awarded against him by the learned Additional Sessions Judge in the said Sessions Case No.
Mangi PW 12 and a neighbours wife Smt.
She was declared hostile by the prosecution.
N. RAY,J. Leave granted.
But the mother who was examined as PW 12 did number support the prosecution case.
Appeal No.
Such appeal was numbered as D.B. Criminal Jail Appeal No.
602/94 were disposed of by the High Court by a companymon judgment dated March 22, 1995, dismissing the Criminal Appeal No.
This appeal is directed against judgment dated March 22, 1995 passed by the Division Bench, Rajasthan High Court Jodhpur Bench .
By the impugned judgment, the High Court affirmed the death sentence passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Banswara, in Sessions Case No.
The appellant sent a special leave petition from the Jail where he is lodged.
