The Supreme Court has sought response from the Union of India through the Attorney General on framing of parameters and guidelines for conducting a trial against a deaf and dumb accused who is otherwise of sound mind and medically fit to commit a heinous offence like rape.

The Court was hearing a Special Leave Petition (SLP) filed by a deaf and dumb individual against a Chattisgarh High Court's Judgment whereby he was held guilty of raping two minor girls aged 7 and 8 years.

The Bench of Justice Surya Kant and Justice KV Viswanathan noted, "We are prima facie satisfied that the Trial Court as well as the High Court have rightly held the petitioner guilty of raping two minor girls aged 7 and 8 years. That being so, the conviction and consequential sentence awarded to the petitioner seems to be justified."

However, the Court noted the absence of parameters and guidelines for conducting trials involving deaf and dumb accused individuals who are otherwise mentally sound and medically fit. The Court said, "Let notice be issued to Union of India through the learned Attorney General for India as well as to the respondent-State, returnable on 26.07.2024 for the purpose of determining the question of law as indicated above."

While declining the prayer of Bail in the matter, the Court scheduled the matter for further hearing on July 26.

Pertinently, in 2022, the High Court had ordered, "...conviction of Accused under Section 376(2)(च) of the IPC and Section 4 of the POCSO Act is set aside, and instead thereof, he is held guilty for the offence under Section 376(2)(च) read with Section 511 of the IPC and Section 4(2) read with Section 18 of the POCSO Act."

Considering Manhar's age of 22 at the time of the incident and his physical impairment of being deaf and dumb, the High Court sentenced him under relevant Sections of the POCSO Act. He was ordered to serve half of a life imprisonment term along with a fine. Additionally, failure to pay the fine would result in further imprisonment.

"Nothing has been brought in the evidence to believe that accused has been falsely implicated in the instant case, rather, since accused is relative of victim girl, i.e. uncle of victim in relation, therefore, question arises that without any reason, why they will implicate their relative in such a heinous crime of rape, that too, with a tender age girl. Therefore, statement of victim and other witnesses which is well supported by medical evidence, cannot be disbelieved, even on the ground of delay of 18 days in lodging the FIR," the High Court's Order read.

The Court had further ordered, "However, looking to the age of the accused, which was said to be 22 years at the time of incident and also considering his physical impairment that he is deaf and dumb, I deem it proper to sentence him under Section 4(2) read with Section 18 of the POCSO Act to undergo one half of the imprisonment for life along with fine of Rs. 1,000/-, in default of payment of fine, he shall further undergo RI for 3 months. Since accused has been convicted for the offence under Section 4(2) read with Section 18 of the POCSO Act and same act is also punishable under Section 376(2)(च) read with Section 511 of the IPC , therefore, considering the provisions of Section 42 of the POCSO Act, he is not being awarded sentence separately for this offence."

Cause Title: Ramnarayan Manhar v. State of Chhattisgarh

Appearance:-

Petitioner: Dr. Nirmal Chopra (AOR)

Click here to read/download the Order


Justice Surya KantJustice KV Viswanathan

Sukriti Mishra