Allow Cookies!
By using our website, you agree to the use of cookies
The decision of imposing a death penalty has been upheld by the MP High Court in the case where a teacher has committed rape against a 4 ½-year-old girl, holding that any other punishment would be inadequate other than that of capital punishment.
A bench comprising of Justice PK Jaiswal and Justice Anjuli Palo has upheld the order of the trial court where the appellant was convicted under Section 363 and Section 376(a)(b) of the Indian Penal Code and that of Section 5(j)(n) of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act and the plea for leniency in punishment of appellant was rejected.
The bench said, “In the present scenario where such type of crimes has continuously increased day-by-day and any kind of reformative ideas are being totally ineffective, there is a demand from Justice that the Court should impose such punishments which would affect the public abhorrence of the commission of the crime.
Justice Palo has said that “A person who is doing a job of nurturing morality and nurturing character in children and committing such act is totally tantamount to moral turpitude”.
In the present case, during the night of July 1, 2018, the minor was sleeping on a cot with her father at the courtyard and at around 10 pm the convict came and met the father and left after having some conversation. At about 12 midnight, the father went to urinate near the pond and by the time he returned the victim was not there. He and the family members started looking for her and when they found her she was lying unconscious and her private parts were bleeding. The girl was rushed to AIIMS hospital and a police case was registered and the accused was arrested. The police stated that the convict kidnapped the minor, a digital rape was first committed by him and when the girl started bleeding, he raped her resulting in she going into an unconscious stage.
The victim herself has identified the appellant in the Court and considering her age the court stated it cannot expect a detailed statement. The Court has relied on her testimony along with other evidence which were sufficient to establish the crime of the appellant.
There were signs of friction in the area of the commission of the crime and even the convict was having injuries on his left-hand finger which was found to be caused in course of sexual assault adding to which even the DNA profile has further confirmed that it was appellate who raped the minor.
When the appellant pleaded to consider his age and no criminal antecedents, the court stated that the rape was brutally committed and there was even possibility of the death of the child based on which the Court said no leniency would be granted. Referring to the Supreme Court’s gang-rape case where the court said: “While consideration of imposition of appropriate punishment, courts should not only keep the rights of criminal in view but even the rights of the victim and society at large”.
Referring to some other cases and considering entire facts and circumstances the court has considered the case to be a “rarest of rare case” and has approved the Capital Punishment stating it is the proper punishment for the appellant as prescribed by the Trial Court under Section 354(5) of Cr.P.C.
86540
103860
630
114
59824