Jharkhand High Court overturns death sentence in minor’s rape and murder case, cites lack of reform assessment

“Even in the backdrop of the fact that accused was involved in three similar nature of cases, and the case related to the gruesome rape and murder of a girl child, the apex court, laying down the law that in absence of any consideration about the probability of reformation, rehabilitation and social reintegration of the appellant into the society, the death sentence awarded upon, could not be maintained, commuted the death sentence of the accused,” the court observed.

Referring to the top court’s Sachin Kumar Singhraha vs. State of MP decision, the high court added that the probability of reformation, rehabilitation, and social reintegration of the appellant cannot be ruled out.

According to the prosecution, the case dates back to 2022, when the man approached the victim.

Later, the child’s body was discovered at a secluded place, and the medical examination confirmed the child had been sexually assaulted and then strangulated.

In 2023, the police submitted the chargesheet, and the trial court took formal cognisance of the offences under Section 302 (punishment for murder) of the IPC and Section 6 (punishment for aggravated penetrative sexual assault) of the POCSO Act.

While taking into consideration the “last seen” testimony and medical experts who detailed the brutal nature of the injuries, the trial court ordered the death penalty for the convict.

Following this, the convict approached the high court against his conviction.

Drawing on the landmark judgments in Rajendra Pralhadrao Wasnik vs. State of Maharashtra the court held that though the extreme penalty of death was not warranted in the facts of this case, the accused does not deserve any major leniency in the matter of remission of the sentence, awarding the capital punishment of death to the petitioner for the offence under Section 302 of the IPC, is hereby, commuted to the life sentence.

Commuting the death penalty to a life sentence, the court said that the alternative option shall serve the interest of justice.

The court added that the sentence passed against the petitioner for the offence under Section 6 of the POCSO Act shall also run concurrently.

“We also hereby affirm his sentence for the offence under Section 6 of the Act,” the court observed.

“Accordingly, the trial court judgment of conviction stands affirmed, with the modification in the sentence of the convict,” the court ruled.

The bench also ordered the compensation to the parents of the victim under the ‘victim compensation scheme’.