In a significant ruling, the Supreme Court recently commuted the death sentence of a man convicted of rape and murder, citing his age at the time of the crime and his socio-economic background as key mitigating factors. The man, aged 22 at the time, hailed from a disadvantaged community with no criminal history in his family.
The case involved the brutal assault and killing of a minor, for which the convict had been sentenced to death under various sections of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and the Protection of Children from Sexual Offenses (POCSO) Act. His appeal to the Supreme Court challenged the lower courts’ failure to weigh mitigating circumstances such as his young age, loss of close family members, and his conduct in prison.
The Supreme Court, led by a bench of Justices BR Gavai, Prashant Kumar Mishra, and KV Viswanathan, agreed that while the crime was heinous, the convict’s background and conduct offered hope for reformation. The Court took into account his non-violent behavior in prison and engagement in positive activities, such as planting trees and maintaining the temple area.
Though the prosecution argued that the crime fell under the ‘rarest of the rare’ category, warranting the death penalty, the Court concluded that the convict’s youth and circumstances justified a more lenient sentence. The Court emphasized that the possibility of rehabilitation could not be ruled out.
Consequently, the death sentence was reduced to a life term of 20 years without remission, marking a pivotal moment in balancing justice with humanity.
