Patna HC Upholds Death Sentence in Rohtas Triple Murder, Cites Mahabharata

Patna (Bihar):
The Patna High Court has upheld the death sentences of two men convicted in a brutal triple murder linked to a land dispute in Rohtas district, drawing on moral lessons from the ancient epic Mahabharata to emphasize the gravity of the crime.

A bench comprising Justices Rajeev Ranjan Prasad and Saurendra Pande dismissed the criminal appeal filed by the convicts, affirming that the offense falls under the rarest of rare category. The judgment, delivered on January 22, 2026, highlighted the extreme cruelty and premeditation involved in the murders of three men—Vijay Singh and his sons Deepak and Rakesh Singh—on July 13, 2021 in Khudraw village.

Court’s Observations

Justice Prasad referenced the Mahabharata, drawing parallels with the conflict between cousins over land and power. The bench observed that, as in the epic, aggressors seeking property and power through violence face divine or legal retribution. “The appellants not only killed three men but also caused irreparable trauma to their wives and children, forcing them to endure a lifetime of grief,” the court noted.

The court concluded that life imprisonment or any alternative punishment would be inadequate, given the crime’s cruelty and the lasting suffering inflicted on the victims’ families.

Details of the Crime

The prosecution stated that the murders were the culmination of a long-standing familial land dispute. The accused allegedly attacked the victims with fists and sticks, pursued them as they tried to escape, and finally inflicted multiple sword wounds. All three victims died before receiving medical aid.

The trial court had previously determined that the attack was premeditated and exceptionally brutal, citing a complete absence of remorse.

Defense Arguments

The convicts’ lawyers argued procedural lapses, including delays in filing the FIR, inconsistencies in witness statements, and alleged inadequacies in investigating land ownership. They claimed these flaws undermined the prosecution’s case, making the death sentence unjust.

Prosecution Response

The state’s Additional Public Prosecutor, Manish Kumar, countered that such procedural gaps did not diminish the overwhelming evidence from eyewitnesses and medical reports. He emphasized that the accused’s conduct, including a co-accused fleeing the scene, demonstrated clear complicity and intent.

Verdict

After careful consideration, the High Court affirmed the death sentence, underscoring that private revenge through extreme violence over land disputes cannot be tolerated. The judgment serves as a stern reminder that the law leaves no room for impunity in the rarest of rare crimes.