As per case facts, two appellants and one approver (Raju) committed the heinous crime of murdering five innocent women, including a pregnant woman, and two young children, during a pre-planned ... robbery. The appellants were charged with multiple offenses under the Indian Penal Code, convicted, and sentenced to death by the Trial Court, which the High Court subsequently confirmed. The appellants, aged 20-22 at the time, appealed, questioning the reliability of the approver's testimony due to alleged contradictions and delayed recording. The question arose whether the approver's uncorroborated testimony could be the sole basis for conviction, particularly for a death sentence, and if the appellants' young age should be a mitigating circumstance. Finally, the Supreme Court dismissed the appeals, upholding the conviction and death sentence. The Court found the approver's testimony reliable and substantially corroborated by numerous circumstantial pieces of evidence. It held that minor discrepancies or delays did not invalidate the testimony. The Court concluded that the crime was pre-planned, cold-blooded, brutal, and involved extreme depravity, qualifying it as a "rarest of rare" case where the youth of the accused did not outweigh the aggravating circumstances of the multiple, merciless murders.