The Chhattisgarh High Court has commuted the death sentence of a man convicted for the rape and murder of a seven-year-old girl in 2021. The court’s Division Bench, led by Chief Justice Ramesh Sinha and Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad, concluded that while the appellant’s crime was heinous, there was no evidence to prove that he could not be reformed. The Bench noted that the appellant, who was 29 years old at the time of the offence and from a backward community, could potentially be rehabilitated.
“These are the incriminating circumstances, but there is no evidence on record that the appellant cannot be reformed or rehabilitated as at the time of offence he was aged about 29 years and he is a member of Other Backward Class, thereby he belongs to backward community and his chances of being reformed or rehabilitated cannot be ruled out,” the Bench observed.
The incident occurred on 28 February 2021, when the appellant lured the victim away from a function, raped her, and then murdered her by crushing her head with a stone. He disposed of the body on the railway tracks to conceal the evidence. The appellant was arrested after the police recovered key evidence, including DNA samples linking him to the crime.
The trial court had convicted the appellant on charges of kidnapping, abduction, rape, and murder, and sentenced him to death. The appellant’s defense argued that the convictions under Sections 363 (kidnapping) and 366 (abduction for illicit intercourse) were redundant. However, the High Court upheld both convictions, stating that each charge was applicable. “Conviction for offence under Section 363 would be just for commission of the offence of kidnapping the deceased from the lawful custody of her guardian and liability under Section 366 of the IPC would be sustainable as the abduction was for the purpose of subjecting the deceased girl to ‘illicit intercourse,’” the court explained, citing prior Supreme Court rulings.
While affirming the convictions, the court questioned the appropriateness of the death sentence. Referencing guidelines from Manoj & Ors. v. State of Madhya Pradesh, the Bench noted that the trial court had failed to consider the possibility of rehabilitation. The report from jail authorities indicated that the appellant had behaved normally while in custody, with no involvement in jail offenses.
“Though it shocks the conscience of society at large, but, yet, in the facts and circumstances of the case, considering the young age of the appellant, upon thoughtful consideration, we are of the view that extreme sentence of death penalty is not warranted in the facts and circumstances of the case,” the court concluded.
As a result, the High Court commuted the death sentence to life imprisonment, ordering the appellant to serve the remainder of his natural life in prison.
(With inputs from LiveLaw)
Subscribe to our channels on Telegram, WhatsApp, and Instagram and get the best stories of the day delivered to you personally.