5 established her involvement in the crime along with the accused persons; every hypothesis of the innocence of the accused was ruled out. 8. After considering the evidence on record, the trial court convicted the appellants of committing the offences they were charged with. On the point of sentence, the trial court took the view that given the magnitude and diabolic manner in which the offences were committed, the case on hand fell under the category of rarest of the rare case and warranted death penalty. High Court’s findings confirming the Trial Court’s order 9. The Division Bench of the High Court7 confirmed the sentences imposed on the appellants and the reference made by the trial court was answered in the affirmative. The High Court concluded that the forensic experts as well as the neighbours and the investigating officer had seen the blood-stained floor, walls, and bedsheets, and that the evidence produced on record with respect to them did not leave any major lacuna in the case of the prosecution; further, the presence of the accused in the house, their intention of committing such a heinous crime, and the manner in which the accused persons had caused the death, had been duly proved. 10. The High Court relied upon the statements of fingerprint expert PW-24 K.K. Dwivedi who visited the site and lifted the chance fingerprints which matched with the appellants’ fingerprints, as well as jewellery recovered from their possession -which was identified by PW-1 and PW-3 as belonging to the deceased. The weapons (knife and country made pistol) used for the commission of the offence were recovered from the accused and the same was proved. Also, the accused persons were duly identified in open court by the witnesses pursuant to their depositions. 7 High Court of Madhya Pradesh, Bench at Indore vide order dt. 29.09.2014 in Criminal Appeal No. 3/2014, Criminal Reference No. 4/2013 and Criminal Appeal No. 266/2014.