MP HC commutes death sentence of tribal youth in child rape case, citing lack of 'brutality', mitigating background
BHOPAL: The Madhya Pradesh High Court has commuted the death sentence of a 20-year-old tribal man convicted of raping and attempting to kill a four-year-old girl, reducing his punishment to 25 years of rigorous imprisonment.
The decision was delivered by a division bench comprising Justices Vivek Agarwal and Devnarayan Mishra, who observed that while the act was undeniably brutal, it did not meet the threshold of "brutality" required for the death penalty under the "rarest of rare" doctrine.
The case involved the convict, a 20-year-old from a Scheduled Tribe, who was found guilty by a trial court under Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (POCSO Act), and sentenced to death.
According to the prosecution, the convict entered the complainant's hut under the pretext of requesting a cot to sleep on, and later abducted and raped the minor victim from a nearby house during the night. He then left her in an unconscious state in a mango orchard, believing her to be dead.
The High Court, while acknowledging the horrifying nature of the crime, noted: 'No doubt that appellant's act was brutal as he has committed rape upon the victim of four years and three months of age and after committing rape also throttled her treating her dead and thrown the victim in such a place where she could not be searched and left the spot but it is also clear that he has not committed brutality,' distinguishing between barbaric acts and acts of extreme cruelty or depravity.
The bench considered several mitigating factors in its decision. The convict was described as an uneducated youth from a tribal community, whose parents never tried to educate or properly care for him. He left his home at an early age and was working in a roadside eatery to earn a living.
There was no evidence of prior criminal conduct, and the court found no adverse reports regarding his behaviour. The bench further noted that the environment in which the convict grew up did not provide him with the proper atmosphere to develop.
The High Court affirmed the conviction under Sections 363, 450, 307, and 201 of the IPC, but commuted the death penalty under Section 6 of the POCSO Act to 25 years of rigorous imprisonment with a fine of Rs. 10,000. In default of payment, the convict will serve an additional year of rigorous imprisonment.
The decision reflects the court's view that, despite the gravity of the offence and the young age of the victim, the circumstances of the convict's background and the absence of extreme brutality did not justify the death penalty in this case.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Time of India
an hour ago
- Time of India
HC orders fresh hearing on sentencing of 2 convicts
1 2 3 Cuttack: The Orissa high court, in a significant development in a death penalty reference case, has directed a fresh hearing on the question of sentence for two convicts, citing lack of a fair and meaningful opportunity to present mitigating circumstances during the trial. A division bench of the high court, comprising Justice Sangam Kumar Sahoo and Justice Sibo Sankar Mishra, issued the direction on Wednesday in the case concerning confirmation of the death sentence awarded to the two convicts by additional sessions judge court, Athmallik, on Sept 27, 2024. The case was referred to the high court by the state govt for confirmation of the capital punishment given to Prakash Behera and Nandakishor Sethy. Both convicts also filed criminal appeals challenging the trial court's verdict. They appeared virtually from circle jail, Angul, along with their legal aid counsel, Dillip Kumar Das. The state was represented by additional government advocate (AGA) Debasis Tripathy. The trial court had convicted Behera and Sethy under Sections 302 (murder), 364 (kidnapping or abducting in order to murder), 201 (causing disappearance of evidence) and 34 (common intention) of the Indian Penal Code. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like 5 Books Warren Buffett Wants You to Read In 2025 Blinkist: Warren Buffett's Reading List Undo The case was deemed to fall under the 'rarest of rare' category as it involved the brutal killing of three members of a family — a husband, wife and their three-year-old son — whose throats were slit. The incident took place on Oct 9, 2017, in Gambharimaliha village under Kishore Nagar police station limits in Angul district. However, the high court noted that there was no meaningful opportunity provided to the appellants to present mitigating evidence before sentencing. "There appears to be no opportunity afforded to the appellants to submit any material in support of the mitigating circumstances," the court observed, taking note that the orders of conviction and sentence were issued on the same day. The bench directed the senior superintendent of circle jail, Angul, to collect detailed reports on the appellants' past life, psychological conditions and post-conviction conduct. The reports must be prepared with assistance from the probation officer, psychologists, jail doctors and other relevant officials. The matter is scheduled for further hearing on June 23, 2025, at 2pm. The court clarified that it has not commented on the merits of the appeal and that the current exercise is limited solely to the sentencing aspect. The AGA has been directed to ensure virtual appearance of the appellants on that day. The appellants have been asked to submit affidavits detailing mitigating circumstances by June 30, 2025. All supporting reports and materials must also reach the high court by the same date.
Time of India
an hour ago
- Time of India
HC judge calls for deeper engagement with law
Dimapur: Justice Y Longkumer, judge of Gauhati High Court, Kohima bench, on Friday called for deeper engagement with law, greater professional development and renewed commitment to justice by the lawyers. She said the panel lawyers, who often serve as the first line of access to justice for the marginalised and under-represented, now play a unique and essential role as educators, advisors and counsellors for common citizens at a time when the Indian legal system is undergoing a pivotal transition with the introduction of new criminal laws. Longkumer was speaking at the one-day orientation programme organised by the Nagaland State Legal Services Authority on new criminal laws — Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam (BSA) — for panel/retainer lawyers and Legal Aid Defence Counsel System lawyers in Kohima. She said the Indian criminal justice system is undergoing significant reforms with the introduction of the BNS, BNSS and BSA, replacing the IPC, CrPC and Indian Evidence Act. "These new legislative reforms are not just mere cosmetic changes but represent a new way of thinking on how the justice system is perceived, delivered and experienced by the common citizens," Longkumer said. She said the lawyers, who serve in the legal services panel, are often the first line of access to justice for the marginalised and under-represented, and their role now is more important than ever. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Top Cardiologist Says This Food Can Do Wonders For Your Health Gundry MD Learn More Undo "You have to learn to adapt to changes with professionalism and as it is with any legal transition, there will be challenges and uncertainties in the interpretation," the judge said. On existing practical difficulties, Longkumer cited the existence of different interpretations and sources, questions and the practical burden of unlearning and relearning while observing that now they have to change their mindset and start to unlearn the IPC, CrPC and learn the new laws.
Time of India
2 hours ago
- Time of India
When Sledging Turns Deadly: Cricket Spat Ends in Murder, Nine Get Life
Chennai: Sledging during a village cricket match in rural Tamil Nadu triggered a cycle of revenge that ended in bloodshed and life sentences. Seventeen years after a 20-year-old was hacked to death with sickles and killed using country bombs in full public view, a trial court sentenced nine men to life imprisonment, holding the murder as premeditated and executed with deadly precision. Tired of too many ads? go ad free now The incident traces back to late 2007, when a match at Koothankuli Polytechnic Ground turned ugly. During the match, Siluvai Anthony Reagan (the deceased) and his friend Elton were assaulted with a cycle chain by Ganesan (alias Ganesh), son of Gandhi, and another player, whose name is also Raegan. Though elders mediated a truce, Ganesan's subsequent jibes at a hotel reignited tensions. The deceased, along with Elton and another youth, retaliated. A police case was filed against them, and they began reporting daily to Kudankulam station as per bail conditions. It was after one such routine police visit on January 22, 2008, that Reagan, Elton, and the complainant boarded a truck back to their village. Around 6.15 pm near Vijayapathi Rice Mill, their vehicle was intercepted by Ganesh's group—armed and waiting. Two motorcycles blocked the front and rear, and others emerged from thorn bushes with sickles. Gandhi (father of Ganesh) hurled a country bomb that hit Elton's right ankle, seriously injuring him. Ganesh followed with another bomb that exploded on the road. Siluvai Anthony Reagan was dragged out of the truck and attacked by multiple assailants. The court noted in forensic detail how each of the accused, including Simbu, John Paul, and others, inflicted targeted cuts using sickles—on his neck, shoulder, and torso—causing instant death. Tired of too many ads? go ad free now Based on confessions, police later recovered 48 country bombs—38 from Gandhi and 10 from Simbu. Convicting nine accused—Gandhi, Ganesh, Simbu, John Paul, Vinod, Sanjay, Anran (son of Aeronimus), James, and Michael (son of Aeronimus)—the Tirunelveli Sessions Court sentenced them to life imprisonment under IPC Sections 302, 148, and 3(a) of the Explosive Substances Act. Gandhi and Ganesh received additional sentences under Sections 326 and 5(a), with all terms to run concurrently. Others were acquitted due to lack of evidence.
