“Lethargy of Public Prosecutor Deplorable”: Allahabad HC Upholds Conviction of Man for Mutilating Genitals of 4-yr Girl

Tanisha Rana

Published on: August 28, 2022 at  20:05 IST

On Friday, the Allahabad High Court upheld the conviction of a man for mutilating the genitals of a four year old girl after having attempted to rape her. 

While upholding the conviction of the man, Justice Krishan Pahal of the Allahabad High Court observed that this one of the most serious and atrocious offences committed against a minor girl of 4 years.

The court said, “The said offence has been committed out of severe sexual lust and sadistic approach. The appellant does not deserve any kind of leniency as the said case stands proved beyond any reasonable doubt by the statement of the prosecution witnesses and the medical evidence adduced.”

The incident had happened in 1998, after which the trial court found the accused guilty under Sections 324 and 354 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) for the offences of outraging a woman’s modesty and voluntarily causing hurt by dangerous weapons or means. The trial court had sentences him to 5 years of rigorous imprisonment.

The single-judge, while hearing the appeal, also took a poor view of the State for not having appealed against the leniency of the trial court’s order for sentencing him to such a short term of imprisonment.

“The lethargy of the public prosecutor is highly deplorable,” the Court stated.

While examining the evidence, the Court found that the prosecution had proven the case beyond reasonable doubt.

“The accused-appellant deserved harsh punishment for the diabolic offence committed by him which depicts his depraved mental status,” the Court said.

Thus, considering the facts of the case, witnesses’ statements, relevant case law and the fact that the accused had committed the offence of mutilating the private parts of the minor girl cannot be termed as an act of a person of normal virtues, the appeal was dismissed by the Court.

Advocates SR Verma and Aarushi Khare represented the appellant and Advocate Vinod Kumar Singh Parmar represented the State.

Related Post