Chaini Parwani –
Published On: November 10, 2021 at 10:36 IST
The Supreme Court noted that the low age of Victims in Rape-and-Murder cases has not been observed as the “Only or sufficient factor by this Court” for advocating the Death Sentence.
A Bench of Justice L Nageswara Rao adjudicated the Supreme Court’s Verdict in Shatrughna Baban Meshram case in which it had observed 67 Judgments of the Supreme Court in the past 40 years in which Death Penalty was imposed by the Trial Court or the High Court for offenses under Sections 376 (Rape) and 302 (Murder) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), and where the age of Victims was below 16 years.
Further with reference to the case, the Court highlighted that out of 67 cases, the Death penalty was awarded to only 15 cases and further 3 cases were commuted Life Sentence.
The Court stated “It appears from the above data that the low age of the Victim has not been considered as the only or sufficient factor by this Court for imposing a Death sentence. If it were the case, then all, or almost all, 67 cases would have culminated in imposition of sentence of Death on the Accused.”
The pronouncement came into light as the Court overruled the Death Penalty imposed on a man for the Kidnapping, Rape, and Murder of a five-year old girl in the village of Khanapur in Karnataka in 2010 and allegedly dumping the body of the Victim in a bag into a stream, named Bennihalla.
Justice Khanna authored that sufficient mitigating factors are found to commute Death Penalty imposed by the Sessions Court and confirmed by the High Court into imprisonment for life, with the direction that the Convict shall not be entitled to early release/remission for the Offence under Section 302 (murder) of the Indian Penal Code until he has sustained actual Imprisonment for at least Thirty years.
The Bench stated “There is no doubt that the Appellant has committed an abhorrent Crime, and for this we believe that incarceration for life will serve as sufficient punishment and penitence for his actions, in the absence of any material to believe that if allowed to live he poses a grave and serious threat to the society, and the imprisonment for life in our opinion would also ward off any such threat. We believe that there is hope for reformation, rehabilitation, and thus the option of imprisonment for life is certainly not foreclosed and therefore acceptable.”
Click Here to Read/Download the Order
Also Read: Burden of Proof in Rape Cases
Landmark Judgements that shaped the Rape Laws in India