'Not Done Brutally Won't Make Rape Non-barbaric...' Supreme Court Awards 30-Years Jail For Convict

The Supreme Court sentences a man to 30-year imprisonment for raping a 7-year-old girl on a temple premises in 2018, saying that his lustful barbaric action will haunt the victim for life. Reports ETV Bharat's Sumit Saxena.

New Delhi:The Supreme Court has sentenced a man to 30-year imprisonment for raping a minor on a temple premises in 2018, saying that “he used a lass aged 7 years to satisfy his lust” and the unfortunate and barbaric action will haunt the victim for her life.

A bench of Justices C T Ravikumar and Rajesh Bindal, in a judgement delivered on February 5, said if the victim is religious and on her “visit to any temple may hark back to her the unfortunate, barbaric action to which she was subjected to”. “The incident may haunt her and adversely impact her future married life”, said the bench.

The bench said, in the instant case, the petitioner-convict was aged 40 years on the date of occurrence and the victim was then only a girl, aged 7 years, and the position is that he used a lass aged 7 years to satisfy his lust. “For that the petitioner-convict took the victim to a temple, unmindful of the holiness of the place, disrobed her and himself and then committed the crime. We have no hesitation to hold that the fact he had not done it brutally will not make its commission non-barbaric”, said the bench.

The apex court ruled that convict Bhaggi should not be released from jail before completion of the actual sentence of 30 years. "We have no hesitation to hold that the fact he had not done it brutally will not make its commission non-barbaric," said the apex court. The convict’s counsel argued that the high court recorded that the manner in which the offence was committed was not barbaric and brutal, and since there was no criminal antecedent, the rigorous imprisonment for 20 years with a minimal fine will be the comeuppance.

The Madhya Pradesh High Court had commuted the convict's sentence from the capital punishment to life term under Section 376 AB of the IPC. The apex court, modifying the high court order, said: “In the circumstances obtained in this case there can be no doubt regarding the requirement of deterrent punishment for the conviction under Section 376 AB, IPC...”

The apex court said that once the conviction is sustained under Section 376 AB, IPC, the fixed term punishment could not be for a period of less than 20 years.

The bench noted the high court’s observation after referring to the manner of commission of the crime concerned that it was not barbaric and brutal. “We are of the concerned view that when the words ‘barbaric’ and ‘brutal’ are used simultaneously they are not to take the character of synonyms, but to take distinctive meanings”, said the bench.

“We have taken note of the hapless situation of the victim after being taken to a temple by the petitioner-convict. The evidence would reveal that unmindful of the holiness of the place he disrobed her and himself and raped her”, noted the bench.

The apex court noted no separate sentences were imposed on the petitioner for the offence under Section 3/4 and 5(m)/6 of the POCSO Act by the trial court, evidently, only on the ground that capital sentence is imposed on the petitioner for the offence under Section 376 AB, IPC.

“In terms of the provisions under Section 376 AB, IPC when a sentence of imprisonment for a term not less than 20 years which may extend up to life imprisonment is imposed, the convict is also liable to suffer a sentence of fine which shall be just and reasonable to meet the medical expenses and rehabilitation of the victim which we quantify as Rupees One Lakh and the same shall be paid to the victim with respect to the conviction under Section 363, IPC”, said the bench, sentencing the convict to 30-years imprisonment.

Read More