Surendra Koli vs State Of U.P. Ors

Reportable IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO 2227 OF 2010

SURENDRA KOLI .........Appellant (s)

Versus

STATE OF U.P. AND ORS. ........Respondent (s)

WITH

SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CRL.) 608 of 2010

O R D E R

Heard Dr. Sushil Balwada, learned counsel, who has

appeared for the appellant Surendra Koli in Criminal Appeal

No. 2227 of 2010.

The appellant Surendra Koli, accused no. 2 and

Maninder Singh Pandher accused no. 1 were convicted under

Section 302/364/376 IPC by the Special Sessions trial no.

611 of 2007 decided on 13.02.2009 by Additional Sessions

Judge, Ghaziabad, U.P. By that judgment death sentence was

imposed on both these accused.

In Appeal/Reference to the High Court accused

Surendra Koli's death sentence was affirmed while the

accused Maninder Singh Pandher was acquitted. Hence,

Surendra Koli has filed this Appeal before us.

The facts of this case are gruesome and horrifying.

It seems that several children had gone missing over 2 years

from Sector 31, Nithari Village, Gautam Budh Nagar, Noida

from 2005 onwards. Several of such children were alleged to

-1- -2-

have been killed by the appellant who is also alleged to

have chopped and eaten the body parts after cooking them.

Appellant Surendra Koli was the servant of accused no. 1

Moninder Singh, and they lived together at D-5, Sector 31,

Noida.

The High Court in the impugned judgment dated

11.09.2009 has discussed the evidence in great detail and we

have carefully perused the same. It is not necessary

therefore to again repeat all the facts which have been set

out in the judgment of the High Court except where

necessary. We entirely agree with the findings, conclusion

and sentence of the High Court so far as accused Surendra

Koli is concerned.

Admittedly, there was a confession made by Surendra

Koli before the Magistrate under Section 164 Cr.PC on

01.03.2007 and we are satisfied that it was a voluntary

confession. The Magistrate repeatedly told the accused

Surendra Koli that he was not bound to make the statement

and it can be read against him. In our opinion the

provisions of Section 164 CrPC have been fully complied with

while recording the said statement.

In the aforesaid statement before the Magistrate

appellant Surendra Koli has admitted in great detail how he

used to kill the girls after luring them inside the House

no. D-5, Sector 31, Noida by strangulating them, and he

would then chop up and eat up their body parts after cooking

them. Some body parts, clothes and slippers were thrown in

-3-

the enclosed gallery behind the house at D-5, Sector 31,

Noida. He volunteered to lead the police team to the

specific spot where he had kept the articles/body parts

hidden. The police party reached that spot along with the

appellant. On his pointing out, 15 skulls and bones were

recovered, and also a knife was recovered from a water tank

of a bath room in D-5, Sector 31. On 31.12.2006 during the

scooping of the drain in front of D-5, bones and chappals

were recovered.

He has given graphic description about the several

murders he has committed. Surendra Koli was the servant of

co-accused Maninder Singh Pandher as has been admitted by

him. The confession under Section 164 has been corroborated

in material particulars. The body parts of the killed girls

have been found in the gallery behind the house and in the

Nala beside the house.

Weapons like knife have also been recovered. The

girls clothes have also been identified.

Two girls PW-27 namely Pratibha and PW-28 namely

Purnima have stated before the trial Court that they were

also attempted to be lured inside the House D-5 by Surendra

Koli but they refused to enter the house. This was their

sheer good luck, for if they would have entered the house

then they might have met the same fate. Their evidence

indicates the modus operandi of the appellant.

The parents of one Rimpa Haldar had filed a missing

report at the police station on 20.07.2005 stating that

their daughter Rimpa aged about 15 years had gone to do

-4-

menial work in Sector 20 on 08.02.2005 but had not returned.

Smt Doli Haldar came to know that in D-5, Sector 31 human

skeleton and clothes had been found. Hence she went there

and identified the chunni and bra of her daughter.

The appellant was charged for the murder of Rimpa

(amongst others), and was found guilty by both the trial

Court and High Court. Although it is a case of

circumstantial evidence we are of the opinion that the

entire chain of circumstances connecting the accused

Surendra Koli with the crime has been established by the

prosecution beyond reasonable doubt.

The DNA test of Rimpa by CDFD, a pioneer institute

in Hyderabad matched with that of blood of her parents and

brother. The Doctors at AIIMS have put the parts of the

deceased girls which have been recovered by the Doctors of

AIIMS together. These bodies have been recovered in the

presence of the Doctors of AIIMS at the pointing out by the

accused Surendra Koli. Thus, recovery is admissible under

Section 27 of the Evidence Act.

On the facts of the case we see no reason to

interfere with the findings of the trial court and the High

Court that the appellant Surendra Koli is guilty of

murdering Rimpa Haldar. Both Courts have gone into the

evidence in great detail and we have perused the same. The

appellant appears to be a serial killer, and these cases in

our opinion fall within the category of rarest of the rare

cases as laid down in Bachan singh Vs State of Punjab, 1982

SCC 689 which has been subsequently followed in Atbir Vs

Government of NCT of Delhi, 2010 SCC (9) 1. -5-

The killings by the appellant Surendra Koli are

horrifying and barbaric. He used a definite methodology in

committing these murders. He would see small girls passing

by the house, and taking advantage of their weakness lure

them inside the house no. D-5, Sector 31, Nithari Village,

Noida and there he would strangulate them and after killing

them he tried to have sex with the body and would then cut

off their body parts and eat them. Some parts of the body

were disposed off by throwing them in the passage gallery

and drain (nala) beside the house. House no. D-5, Sector 31

had become a virtual slaughter house, where innocent

children were regularly butchered.

In our opinion, this case clearly falls within the

category of rarest of rare case and no mercy can be shown to

the appellant Surendra Koli.

The appeal is, therefore, dismissed.

SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CRL.) 608 of 2010

Leave granted.

.....................J. [MARKANDEY KATJU]

.....................J. [GYAN SUDHA MISRA] NEW DELHI;

FEBRUARY 15, 2011