"He Has Not Committed Brutality": Madhya Pradesh High Court Commutes Death Sentence Of Man Convicted For Raping 4-Yr-Old Girl Child
The Madhya Pradesh High Court took note of the fact that the accused is uneducated youth of 20 years of age and belongs to the tribal community.
Justice Vivek Agarwal, Justice Devnarayan Mishra, Madhya Pradesh High Court
The Madhya Pradesh High Court has commuted the death sentence of a man convicted for raping a four-year-old minor girl child.
The Court was dealing with a Criminal Appeal and a Criminal Reference filed against the Judgment of conviction and sentence passed by the Special Judge, who convicted the accused with death penalty for the offence punishable under Section 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (POCSO Act and also convicted under Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life along with a fine amount of Rs. 2,000/-.
A Division Bench comprising Justice Vivek Agarwal and Justice Devnarayan Mishra observed, “Looking to the above observations and discussions, in this case, no doubt that appellant’s act was brutal as he has committed rape upon the victim of four years and three months of age and after committing rape also throttled her treating her dead and thrown the victim in such a place where she could not be searched and left the spot but it is also clear that he has not committed brutality.”
The Bench took note of the fact that the accused is uneducated youth of 20 years of age and belongs to the tribal community and his parents never tried to give him education and did not properly take care of him; therefore, he left his house and was self-bread earner and living and working in a Dhaba (Restaurant).
Deputy Advocate General (DAG) Yash Soni appeared for the Petitioner while Senior Advocate Sanjay Kumar Agrawal and Advocate Kamal Singh Rajput appeared for the Respondent.
Brief Facts
As per the prosecution case, in 2022, a four-year-old minor girl of PW-2 came from his village in the house of PW-1 along with PW-5. The Complainant (PW-1) along with his wife PW-6 was sleeping outside his hut whereas his son PW-7 and the victim were sleeping in the cot inside hut. PW-6 closed the door and put latch on the gate and in the morning when she went inside the house, she saw that the son was sleeping alone in the cot and the victim was not there. Thereafter, a search was made in nearby places and relations. It was alleged that the Appellant-accused came into the hut of PW-1 and demanded a cot to sleep.
PW-1 had given him a cot and at some distance from the hut, the accused was sleeping in the cot. In the morning, they saw that the accused was also not found in his cot. On this doubt, the accused was arrested and on his disclosure, the victim was recovered from a mango garden in injured and unconscious condition. The victim was immediately rushed to hospital where she was given first aid and after that, she was rushed to Bombay Hospital, Indore. From the spot, incriminating articles were recovered and after usual investigation, charge-sheet was submitted before the Special Judge. The Trial Court awarded death sentence and hence, this was challenged before the High Court.
Reasoning
The High Court in view of the above facts, said, “In this case, there are aggravating circumstances that the victim was four year old and the rape was committed upon such a kid and offence was committed in such a way that the private part of the victim was torn and after committing the offence, the victim was thrown in the solitary place treating her that she had died.”
The Court noted that the mitigating circumstances in the case are that the accused is youth of tribal community aged about 20 years and there is no adverse comment regarding his conduct.
“There is no report that he has previously committed any such type of offence and as per the statement of his mother, he left the parental house at the very early age and was working in the Dhaba and earning his bread. He is not properly educated”, it added.
The Court further observed that the atmosphere in Dhaba is not such, by which it can be inferred that the accused was given the proper atmosphere to grow up.
“Hence, sentence imposed upon the appellant for the offence punishable under Sections 363, 450, 307, 201 of the Indian Penal Code is affirmed but his sentence for the offence punishable under Sections 6 of the POCSO Act is converted from Capital Punishment to the rigorous imprisonment of 25 years with the fine amount of Rs.10,000/- and in default of fine amount (actual incarceration without remission/commission under Section 432 and 433 of Code of Criminal Procedure), the appellant shall further suffer rigorous imprisonment of one year”, it also held.
Accordingly, the High Court answered the reference, partly allowed the Appeal, and commuted the death sentence.
Cause Title- In Reference v. Rajaram @ Rajkumar (Neutral Citation: 2025:MPHC-JBP:26514)
Appearance:
Petitioner: DAG Yash Soni
Respondent: Senior Advocate Sanjay Kumar Agrawal, Advocates Kamal Singh Rajput, Mihir Agrawal, and Samar Singh Rajpoot.
