NEW DELHI: A day after commuting the death sentence of Govindachamy the lone accused in the infamous murder of Saumya, the Supreme Court on Friday commuted the death sentence of a man convicted of raping and murdering a seven-year-old girl in Jabalpur in 2011 and sentenced him to 25 years imprisonment without remission, holding that the offence does not fall under the category of “rarest of rare” case.
A Bench of justices J Chelameswar, Shiva Kirti Singh and A M Sapre, while sentencing the man, considered the fact that there may be probabilities of such crime being repeated in case the convict is allowed to come out of the prison on completing life imprisonment of 14 years.
“The occurrence is of the year 2011 when the appellant was said to be about 27. Considering the fact that the deceased, a helpless child, fell victim of the crime of lust at the hands of the appellant and there may be probabilities of such crime being repeated in case the appellant is allowed to come out of prison on completing usual period of imprisonment for life which is taken to be 14 years... We are of the view that the appellant should be inflicted with imprisonment for life with a further direction that he shall not be released from prison till he completes actual period of 25 years of imprisonment,” the Bench said while dismissing the appeals of convict Tattu Lodhi alias Pancham Lodhi and modifying the sentence.
The Bench said the facts of the case does not make out a “rarest of rare” case so as to confirm the death sentence of the appellant. “The death penalty is therefore not confirmed,” the court said, noting the submission of counsel for the convict who sought 20 years in jail, while the Madhya Pradesh government, which earlier sought confirmation of death sentence, later demanded jail term for the entire natural life.
The Bench upheld the findings of the trial court and the High Court in convicting Lodhi for kidnapping the victim and later murdering the minor after subjecting her to sexual abuse.
“We find no good reason to interfere with the findings of the trial court, duly confirmed by the High Court, that the appellant-accused kidnapped the victim and after subjecting her to sexual abuse, throttled her to death,” the Bench said rejecting Lodhi’s submission that the chain of circumstantial evidence is not complete and does not prove his guilt.