2025 INSC 538

Crl.A.Nos.1179-80/2023 Page 1 of 17

NON-REPORTABLE

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO S.1179-1180 OF 2023

REJI KUMAR ALIAS REJI … APPELLANT

Versus

STATE OF KERALA … RESPONDENT

J U D G M E N T

SANJAY KAROL, J.

1. This case is the second one of its nature that has become

ripe for judgment in a short while wherein a husband and father

has allegedly forgotten all propriety, morality and responsibility

toward his family members. The prosecution contends that Reji

Crl.A.Nos.1179-80/2023 Page 2 of 17

Kumar – appellant herein had, over a period of few days killed

his wife Lissy and four children, namely, 1

st

daughter (12 years

old), son (10 years old), 2

nd

daughter (9 years old) and 3

rd

daughter (3 years old). We are left to wonder as to how someone

who is supposed to feel the utmost love, care and affection for

the young lives could have come to committing such a crime -

where the lights of these lives have been extinguished in the most

brutal of manners.

2. These appeals are directed against the final judgment and

order dated 12

th

November, 2014 in Death Reference No.1/2010

and Criminal Appeal No.1663 of 2010 passed by the High Court

of Kerala at Ernakulam. The former travelled up to the High

Court by way of statutory requirement and the latter was

preferred by the appellant against the conviction and sentence

recorded against him by the Sessions Court, Palakkad in

S.C.No.114 of 2009, under Sections 302, 376, 297 and 201 of the

Indian Penal Code, 1860

1

.

Brief Facts

3. The facts, as set out by the Courts below giving rise to the

present appeals, are :

1

Hereinafter ‘IPC’

Crl.A.Nos.1179-80/2023 Page 3 of 17

3.1 The appellant-convict was employed in the fields of

one Aboobacker Sidique (PW-1) as an agricultural worker

at a monthly salary of Rs.7,000/- and used to live in rented

accommodation, in the ownership of Rasheed PW-6. In the

course of such employment, he developed intimate relations

with Baby alias Usha PW-24. Lissy went missing on 9

th

July, 2008. On 11

th

July 2008 he took his son and 3

rd

daughter saying that he would return with his wife and

children. Thereafter, the neighbours made repeated

inquiries but were always met with evasive answers.

3.2 On 20

th

July 2008, he informed PW-1 that he was

headed to Kottayam and would return on the same day with

his family. On 21

st

and 22

nd

July 2008, Safina PW-2, wife

of PW-1 noted that the house was locked from the outside,

but the next day she found it locked from inside. When, on

knocking she got no answer, she informed her husband and

they together investigated the house. Finally, three people

secured entry - PW-1, his brother Biju PW-4 and PW-6 and

found 1

st

daughter and 2

nd

daughter lying prone, dead. The

police were informed, and accordingly, FIR No.456/08

dated 23

rd

July, 2008 came to be registered at PS Pattambi,

District Palakkad.

3.3 Also on 25

th

July 2008, the bodies of Lissy, the son

and 3

rd

daughter were discovered in the septic tank and the

Crl.A.Nos.1179-80/2023 Page 4 of 17

nearby fields respectively, after people were alerted by a

foul smell emanating from the former location. The

requisite documentation regarding recovery of all the

deceased persons was prepared.

3.4 The appellant convict was taken into custody on 27

th

July, 2008.

3.5 The final report was submitted under Section 302,

376, 297 and 201 IPC before the Judicial 1

st

Class

Magistrate, Pattambi on 23

rd

October, 2008, from where it

was committed to the Court of Sessions. The appellant

convict was defended by legal aid counsel.

Trial Court

4. The convict appellant pleaded not guilty. To prove its

case, the prosecution examined 44 witnesses marked 72 exhibits

and identified 36 material objects. The Court framed six issues

for consideration :

“1. Whether the accused has caused the death of Lissy, 1

st

daughter, 2

nd

daughter, son and 3

rd

daughter?

2. Whether the accused committed rape or his daughter 1

st

daughter?

3. Whether the accused has caused disappearance of

evidence bas alleged by the prosecution?

Crl.A.Nos.1179-80/2023 Page 5 of 17

4. Whether the accused has shown disrespect to the dead

body so as to attract an offence under Section 297 IPC?

5. What are the offences if any committed by the accused?

6. What is the sentence to be imposed?”

5. In paragraph 22, the Court takes notice of the

circumstances sought to be proven by the prosecution against the

appellant-convict, which read as follows :

“a. The motive for committing the crime;

b. The fact that the accused and deceased were last seen

together by some of the prosecution witnesses;

c. Conduct of the accused and the falsity of the explanation

given by him;

d. Recovery of certain material objects; and

e. Medical and scientific evidence”

After detailed consideration of the evidence under the

heads as above, it was concluded by the Trial Court that the

convict-appellant had indeed committed the murders of his wife

and four children. It was also concluded that he had deliberately

concealed the bodies of the deceased persons and caused

disappearance of evidence of such acts in order to escape from

punishment. As such, he was convicted for having committed

offences punishable under the Sections noted in paragraph 2. On

the charge under 297 IPC it was held that the evidence as

produced by the prosecution was insufficient to sustain the same.

Crl.A.Nos.1179-80/2023 Page 6 of 17

He was, therefore, acquitted of said charge. On the aspect of

sentence, the Court considered the following factors in awarding

capital punishment :

a) The nature of the crime being extremely brutal,

diabolical and revolting;

b) The appellant-convict had a responsibility to nurture

and protect, instead he became the destructor and killed

helpless children;

c) He betrayed the trust of his wife. It is not as if he is an

uneducated man. He holds a degree in chemistry and

a graduate diploma in computer applications;

d) The manner of commission of the crime was well

arranged and planned. The defence counsel’s

argument that the offence was out of unhappiness and

frustration, and not criminal tendency, was rejected.

Placing reliance on Siriya alias Shri Lal v. State of

Madhya Pradesh

2

, the appellant-convict was sentenced to death.

For the offence under Section 376 IPC he was sentenced to 10

years’ rigorous imprisonment and for the offence under Section

201 IPC he was sentenced to rigorous imprisonment of 7 years.

Both these offence also carried a fine of Rs.1,000/-, in default

2

(2008) 8 SCC 22

Crl.A.Nos.1179-80/2023 Page 7 of 17

whereof one month's simple imprisonment was also to be

undergone. They were all to run concurrently.

High Court

6. Vide the impugned judgment, the High Court after

reviewing the evidence and addressing the arguments of the

counsel, it was held that the argument of the appellant-convict

that the case of the prosecution is feeble and the findings of guilt

cannot be sustained, is not liable to be accepted. The finding of

guilt is justified on the basis of the material placed on record.

After considering various judgments of this Court, it was

observed :

“59. Here, the evidence is conclusive enough to hold

that the appellant had no repentance at all. After

finishing off 1

st

daughter and 2

nd

daughter the appellant

left the place and after reaching Kottayam he

telephonically expressed his desire to join PW24. The

evidence would indicate that the intention of the

appellant was to live with PW24 after annihilating his

family. This is a strong indication which compels us to

hold that the alternative option of rehabilitation is

unquestionably foreclosed.

60. The appellant was educated and it has come out in

evidence that during some time he had worked as an

advocate’s clerk. The socio economic background of the

appellant not at all justifies any of this actions.

Therefore, such a mitigating factor is absent in the

present case. We have come to this conclusion after

Crl.A.Nos.1179-80/2023 Page 8 of 17

approaching the question of sentence from a broad

sociological point of view.

x x x

63. Here the facts of this case would reveal that the

appellant planned the murder of his wife and four

children and executed the same in succession, during a

period of two weeks, which would indicate that it was a

pre-calculated cold blooded murder.

x x x

68. Viewed in that profile, we are of the definite and

considered view that the crime committed by the

appellant in this case satisfies the crime test fully

whereas, it does not satisfy the criminal test at all. The

nature of the offences and the manner in which offences

have been committed to not help the tilting of balance in

favour of the appellant. While carrying out this complex

exercise, we cannot forget our obligation to see the

impact of the offence on the society as a whole and its

profound ramifications. Therefore, we are of the view

that the sentence imposed by the trial court on the

appellant does not call for an interference and the

imposition of a the lesser alternative is unquestionably

foreclosed for the reasons stated above.

In the result, we uphold the findings of guilt and

conviction of the appellant under Sections 302, 376 and

201 of the Indian Penal Code and confirm the death

sentence imposed upon the appellant by the trial court

under Section 302 IPC in exercise of the powers

conferred on this Court under Section 368 read with

Section 366(1) Cr.P.C., as there is absolutely nothing to

interfere with the order of sentence.

The Death Reference is answered accordingly.

We also confirm the sentence imposed upon the

appellant under Section 376 and 201 IPC.”

Crl.A.Nos.1179-80/2023 Page 9 of 17

7. It is in this background that the confirmation of death

sentence, in a statutory appeal as also the convict-appellant’s

appeal against judgment and sentence, is before us.

8. We have heard Ms. Sonia Mathur and Mr. P.V. Dinesh,

learned Senior Counsel appearing for the respective parties.

9. Consideration of the evidence by the Trial Court has taken

place under the heads of motive, the circumstance of last seen,

conduct of the accused, recovery of material objects and medical,

scientific evidence. We shall adopt the same method. The

following is a tabular encapsulation of the witnesses relied on by

the Trial Court and independently re-examined by the High Court

in order to establish the guilt of the convict-appellant -

Sr.

No.

Heading Relied on

1. Motive Aboobacker Siddique PW-1,

Krishnakutty PW13, Ushadevi

PW-24 and Sheela Sara

Abraham PW-26

2. Last seen PW-1, Safina PW-2, Suhara PW-

7, Sajan Antony PW-9, Shaji

K.R. PW-17 and Sunny PW-18

3. Conduct Sarojini Amma PW-25 and Ex.27

4. Medical and

Scientific

evidence

Dr. P.C. Ignatius PW-31 and

Ex.72

Crl.A.Nos.1179-80/2023 Page 10 of 17

10. PW-1 testifies that he had no direct knowledge of

conversations between PW-24 and the convict-appellant. PW-

13, namely, Krishnankutty, has testified that he and PW-24 were

very close and the factum of their closeness was told to him by

the convict-appellant himself stating that he wished to marry her.

PW-24, namely, Ushadevi @ Baby said that she and the convict-

appellant would speak on the phone 10-15 times a day. She has

testified that sexual relations took place between them on the

night of 8

th

July 2007, i.e., the day that he had allegedly killed

Lissy. The convict-appellant had apparently told her that there

had been no conjugal relations between him and the deceased

Lissy for the last five years and that the youngest child, namely,

3

rd

daughter, was not fathered by him. PW-26, namely, Sheela

Sara Abraham, nodal officer of Tata Teleservices Ltd. testified

that there had been numerous calls from the number

‘9288173334’ to ‘9388920657’ and later to ‘9961625774’, both

numbers belonging to the convict-appellant as testified by PW-

24. She further stated that there was another number which

ended in the numbers ‘812’ and that they would often call each

other using said number. Ex.27 are the call details between the

numbers ‘9747017812’ and ‘9961625774’. A cumulative

consideration of the above testimonies does point to the presence

of sufficient motive. He suspected infidelity on the part of the

deceased Lissy and that she had borne a child out of wedlock,

Crl.A.Nos.1179-80/2023 Page 11 of 17

along with the fact that there was no physical relation between

them.

11. Now we consider the evidence in respect of the last seen

theory. PW-1 testified that on 8

th

July 2008 he had seen Lissy

walking along with the convict-appellant to their house. When he

saw the convict-appellant working in the field on 13

th

July 2008

he enquired regarding Lissy and their two children to which the

reply was that they were away visiting her maternal uncle and

would be back on 17

th

July 2008. When they did not return on the

said date, he said that one of the children was being admitted to

a convent at Pala for studies and he would go there on 20

th

and

return with his wife on the same day. Yet he did not return.

PW-1 stated to have been present at the time of recovery of the

bodies as well. PW-2 states that she saw Lissy on 8

th

July 2008,

her son and 3

rd

daughter on 11

th

July 2008, i.e., the day after they

had taken these two children along with themselves to attend a

wedding on 10

th

July 2008. The other two children, 2

nd

daughter

and 1

st

daughter were last seen when they were at home in the

summer vacations. She further testified that around this time,

when she had enquired from the convict-appellant regarding

Lissy, she was also told the same story as PW-1. PW-7 namely

Suhara, a neighbour of PW-1, stated that she had seen the convict

appellant getting down from an autorickshaw with his children -

son and 3

rd

daughter and entering the house on 12

th

July 2008.

Crl.A.Nos.1179-80/2023 Page 12 of 17

This has been taken as clinching evidence by the Courts below.

PW-9, namely, Sajan Antony, the Headmaster of St. Joseph’s

UPS, Vellilappally, has testified that on 22

nd

July 2008 the

convict-appellant came to the school desiring to take away 1

st

daughter and 2

nd

daughter, on the pretext that his mother had

passed away, to which he had no objection but said that requisite

permission should be taken from the concerned authority of the

children’s home where they resided. Connected with the above is

the convict-appellant’s travel to Kottayam and stay at Bino

Lodge from 20

th

July 2008 to 21

st

July 2008, which fact is

testified to PW-17 and PW-18.

12. In regard to the conduct of the convict-appellant, the

Courts below have taken note of the following factors :

(a) Repeatedly giving false statements regarding the

whereabouts of Lissy, 1

st

daughter and 2

nd

daughter when

enquiries were made about them by PW-1 & PW-2.

(b) Not turning up or making himself available even

after the incident had been reported widely across all forms

of media.

(c) Travel to Kottayam immediately after the death of

his son and 3

rd

daughter, as also making of the phone calls

to PW-24 on the same day expressing desire to meet her.

By such time the news regarding the death of two of his

Crl.A.Nos.1179-80/2023 Page 13 of 17

children had spread and when she informed him of the same,

his response was allegedly cool.

All of these factors, pointed to suspicious conduct on the

part of the convict-appellant. We agree with such a conclusion.

It is inconceivable to us as to how a person can have a calm

response, brushing off allegations levied against him of having

killed his own children, especially, when the same is being

informed to him by a person who possesses intense feelings for

and because of which she refuses to meet him. That apart, there

is also another important aspect, i.e., the gaps in the deaths of the

five persons. Lissy went missing on 8

th

July 2008, two of the

children were last seen on 12

th

July 2008 and the other two were

collected all the way from another city and then killed. It is also

to be noted that the reason why he wanted to take away the two

children studying in a boarding school was that his mother,

Sarojini Amma, had died. This was plainly a lie. In fact, she has

testified as PW-25. This suggests to us a clear plan in the mind

of the convict-appellant to end the lives of all members of his

immediate family. Such conduct is certainly reeking of guilt.

13. The prosecution has used scientific and medical evidence

to establish the factum of rape being committed on 1

st

daughter

by the convict-appellant. PW-31 - Dr. P.C. Ignatius, who was at

the relevant time Associate Professor and Deputy Police Surgeon

in the Medical College Hospital, Trissur, testified that the cause

Crl.A.Nos.1179-80/2023 Page 14 of 17

of death of 1

st

daughter was throttling. He reported the detection

of semen and spermatozoa due to the possibility of sexual assault.

He also noted that there were old tears in the hymen of 1

st

daughter, indicating prior sexual assault. Ex. P72 (appended at

page 564 of convenience compilation), which is the DNA Report

prepared by the Senior technical examiner, shows that semen

collected from the convict-appellant matches the biological fluid

present in the vaginal swab of 1

st

daughter. There can be no

denying the same. It has also been observed by the learned Trial

Court that there was no gap in the collection of samples, then

being taken to the lab and the report thereof being prepared.

Hence, we see no reason to take a different view on this count.

14. With the above discussion, the primary charges of

Sections 302 (four counts) & 376 (one count) IPC, stand proved.

We affirm the findings of the Courts below. The conviction of

the convict-appellant, therefore, remains undisturbed. We shall

now proceed to the aspect of sentence.

15. The Courts below, upon consideration of a sum total of

circumstances, found the instant case to be fitting into the rarest

of rare doctrine as discussed in Bachan Singh v. State of

Punjab

3

. The question before us now is whether such

determination was correct and/or justified. In order to examine

the same, we must look into the aggravating and mitigating

3

(1980) 2 SCC 684

Crl.A.Nos.1179-80/2023 Page 15 of 17

circumstances of the present case. Prior to doing so, we may

elude the findings made in the Probation Officer’s report,

mitigating investigator’s report and the report of psychological

assessment submitted to this Court in compliance of the

principles laid down in Manoj v. State of Madhya Pradesh

4

. The

following factors can be cumulatively noticed from the above

reports:

(a) Unblemished conduct in prison - the jail authorities

appeared to have trust in him and he has repeatedly been

given positions which require discipline, responsibility and

reliability;

(b) Severe mental distress - He has exhibited certain

behaviours that are means of coping with overwhelming

distress originating in the past from issues, such as neglect

parental mental illness and substance dependence, unstable

home environment, physical and sexual abuse, all of these

factors have been amplified by the uncertainty of being on

death row;

(c) Renewed sense of purpose - He has used the money

earned to donate to different causes, such as towards the bail

amount of co-prisoners, totaling Rs.83,000/-. He is also

stated to have hopes to spend time in social service in the

future. His issues with anger seem to have abated.

4

(2023) 2 SCC 353

Crl.A.Nos.1179-80/2023 Page 16 of 17

(d) No criminal antecedents prior to the said acts and no

violent acts perpetrated in jail.

16. The aggravating circumstances have already been

discussed in the preceding paragraphs, but are once again pointed

out here:

(a) Brutality of the crime;

(b) Pre-determined intention to kill all family members;

(c) No remorse even after having killed one person since

there was adequate time between the killings of Lissy,

which is presumed to be on 8

th

July 2008 when she

disappeared, and of two of the children few days later

and the two other children almost ten days thereafter;

(d) Sexual assault on his own daughter;

(e) Multiple persons killed.

17. Keeping in view the discussion made in Ramesh A. Naika

v. Registrar General, High Court of Karnataka Etc.

5

and

considering the facts that the convict-appellant had no prior

antecedents; good conduct for the past 16-17 years of

incarceration; difficulties in mental health and consistent efforts

at being a model prisoner, we find that the imposition of death

penalty would be unjustified. He is, therefore, removed from

death row. However, considering the severity of the crime, the

5

2025 SCC OnLine SC 575

Crl.A.Nos.1179-80/2023 Page 17 of 17

number of persons killed, that out of five four were his own

children, we are of the view that he does not deserve to be set free

and direct that he shall spend the remainder of his days in jail, till

his last breath, hoping to do acts of penance to atone for the

crimes he has committed and particularly for the fact that he

extinguished four bright flames.

18. The appeals are partly allowed accordingly. The death

sentence is commuted to life imprisonment till the end of natural

life. The appeal filed by the convict-appellant is partly allowed.

Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of.

……...…...…………J.

(VIKRAM NATH)

……...………………J.

(SANJAY KAROL)

………………………J.

(SANDEEP MEHTA)

New Delhi;

22

nd

April, 2025.