[2] However, if the other parameters of the offence stands established, then the plea of non-discovery of the dead body of the victim is of no consequence in proving the corpus delicti in murder.
If no evidence is called for the defence the tribunal of fact must decide whether the prosecution has succeeded in discharging its legal burden by proving its case beyond a reasonable doubt.
The time honoured expression that the court must be satisfied “beyond reasonable doubt” has been accepted in Common-Law countries as the standard of proof in criminal cases.
Source:[3] Rarest of the rare case is the principle enshrined in Bachan Singh v. State of Punjab which limits the vast discretion of the court in imposing death penalty.
The phrase “rarest of the rare” case still remains to be defined while the concern for human life, the norms of a civilised society and the need to reform the criminal has engaged the attention of the courts.
In Bachan Singh v. State of Punjab, the Supreme Court held that following mitigating circumstances are relevant and must be given weightage in determination of sentence.
[4] Case 2; In State v. Sushil Sharma the accused pursuing political career was living with the deceased, a fellow female leader, without claiming her to be his wife.
Case 3; In Swamy Sharaddananda @ Murli Manohar Mishra v. State of Karnataka, the death of wife was caused by administering a high dose of sleeping drugs and she was kept alive in a wooden box.
The accused had not paid the due amount for rent and food and when the landlord demanded payment, he lured them into his home and committed the crime.
It was held that circumstances were indicating that the accused was perpetrator of crime and he was rightly convicted under section 302/436 IPC but death sentence was altered to imprisonment for life as it was not a rarest of the rare case.