SC reduces 2016 Delhi rape convict's life sentence, cites good jail conduct
The Supreme Court on Monday reduced the sentence of a man convicted in a 2016 rape case from life imprisonment to 20 years in jail
The Supreme Court on Monday reduced the sentence of a man convicted in a 2016 rape case from life imprisonment to 20 years in jail with the benefit of remission, saying there was a possibility of reformation as he was 25 when the offence was committed. The trial court had sentenced him to rigorous imprisonment for the remainder of his natural life, and the Delhi High Court had upheld that decision. Read Full Story A bench of Justices Sanjay Karol and Augustine George Masih noted that the convict had no criminal antecedents and had maintained good conduct in jail. “In the present case, the appellant convict has no criminal antecedents; was of only 25 years when the offence was committed; given the young age there is a possibility of reformation.
The State has neither brought on record anything to show that the same would not be possible, nor has it contravened the statement made on behalf of the appellant that in the nearly ten years (including remission) that he has been convicted, he has maintained a good conduct,” the bench said. The case relates to an FIR registered on September 7, 2016, after a call was received at the I P Estate police station in New Delhi alleging that two accused persons had raped the victim. According to the case, the victim took a rickshaw from Delhi railway station at night after the driver assured her that he would drop her home. Instead, he took her to a deserted place where another person was already present, and the two then raped her.
The top court said it could not lose sight of the fact that the offence was heinous and was not only against the victim but against society at large. “Despite much evolution, sociologically and psychologically, to break away from the chains of patriarchal thought, incidents such as these are only continuing unabashedly. Various amendments have been brought in over the years in the law, and while they may have had positive impact to some extent, the urgency to root out such offences cannot be simmered down even for a bit till these incidents are recorded only in history and are viewed with collective disdain,” the bench said. The court also quoted Justice K Ramaswamy, who said, “By deft modulation of sentencing process be stern where it should be, and tempered with mercy where it warrants to be.” It noted that Section 376D of the IPC, under which the convict was sentenced, was substituted through the 2013 Criminal Law Amendment brought in after the Nirbhaya case in the national capital.
The BriefWire