C2RM… To Know More
Something Awesome Is In The Work
The Supreme Court adjourned an Allahabad High Court judgment awarding death penalty to a 31-year-old man convicted of raping and murdering a 12-year-old girl.
The accused may not be hardened criminal and may not have any previous criminal antecedents, but the manner the crime was committed brings his case into atypical cases.
The order passed by judges of two Bench comprising Justice L. Nageswara Rao and Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul stated that "Leave granted, There shall be a stay of the execution of the death sentence awarded to the petitioner." Additional Sessions Judge, Allahabad awarded death penalty to the appellant, and penalised his co-accused with life imprisonment.
The FIR was lodged by the girl's father who stated that she went out on the evening of September 4, 2012, to relieve herself but did not return. Her father and others launched a search. The very next day her disrobed body was found, following which her father lodged an FIR against unknown persons.
Putai (appellant) and Dileep (co-accused) were charged with offences under Sections 376(2) (G) (gang-rape), 302 (murder) and 201 (causing the disappearance of evidence of offence, or giving false information to screen offender) of the Indian Penal Code which happened after police investigation. After the trial judge noted that Putai was the one who killed her and also inflicted ante-mortem injuries on her and the court had opined that he did not deserve any sympathy, owing to the brutality involved in the case. The two convicts had now challenged their conviction inter alia asserting that the prosecution case was based on circumstantial evidence.
The HC opined that the prosecution had proved the case beyond query and rightly held them guilty.
Further observed, "The postmortem report of the girl clearly shows as to how viciously the victim was subjected to influential rape and murdered thereafter by strangulation.”
In order to satisfy their lust, the appellants committed crime and this reflects the mental conditions of the appellants. They committed rape on a minor girl and thereafter murdered her and also tried to conceal the evidence by throwing her body to a nearby field. The injuries found on her body also reflects the that rape was committed in a forceful manner and one can imagine that how much pain she must have suffered during the commission of crime by the appellants.
Additionally, the court asserted
that "The crime like this rarest of the rare, cannot be looked with giving
any sympathy to the appellants. The factors like the age of the accused (12
year old) and poor background cannot be stated to be the mitigating
circumstances. We do not find any justification to convert the death sentence
provided by the learned trial court to life imprisonment for the rest of the