Death sentence is a measure of social necessity for deterring other potential offenders, the high court had observed
The Supreme Court has stayed the execution of death sentence awarded to a man accused of rape and murder of an 11-year-old girl.
A bench of Justice AM Khanwilkar and Justice Indu Malhotra, on the Special Leave Petition filed by one of the accused viz. Bhagwani, issued notice and called for original records from the high court.
MP High Court judgment
The Jabalpur bench had confirmed the death penalty of two accused that the only punishment which they deserve for having committed the reprehensible and gruesome murder of an innocent child to satisfy their lust, is nothing but death.
A bench of Justice SK Seth and Justice Nandita Dubey had also observed that it is immensely appalled by the alarming increase in the recent incidents of child rapes and also being aware of the rising anger of the society over rape of minor across the country, therefore, considers death sentence as a measure of social necessity and also a mean of deterring other potential offenders.
One of the main contentions in the appeal was regarding the statement made in defence by the accused under Section 313 of the CrPC. The bench held that such a statement given can be used for proving their guilt as much as the evidence given by the prosecution witnesses. The court also observed that the accused alleging ineffective assistance must show that for counsel’s ineffective assistance and unprofessional errors, the result of the trial would have been different.
While confirming death sentence, Justice Nandita Dubey, who authored the judgment, said: “A helpless child of 11 years, who had gone to keep her belongings to the house of accused Satish was kidnapped and subsequently raped. She was also subjected to carnal intercourse and made to suffer untold pain and agony. The accused did not stop there, but they strangulated her, threw her half-naked body near the road, in total disregard of the decency and respect for a dead female body. Considering that the deceased was an innocent child, who could not have provided any excuse, much less any provocation for committing such heinous act, coupled with the subsequent conduct of throwing the half-naked body of the deceased in the open exhibiting their abusive conduct, and acting normal after commission of the crime, asking for liquor from Jaipal shows lack of any remorse on their part.”
The high court judgment also quotes a provision of the ordinance promulgated recently providing the death penalty for rapists of girls below 12 years of age and other stringent penal provisions for rape.