Hanging in imbalance

Death sentence in the Sharon murder case has become polarising talking point. TNIE speaks to experts to assess the verdict
Greeshma exiting the court after the verdict
Greeshma exiting the court after the verdictPhoto | B P Deepu
Updated on
6 min read

KOCHI: On Monday, the sensational ‘Sharon murder case’ reached a sensational culmination at the Neyyattinkara Additional Sessions Court. S S Greeshma, 24, the prime accused in the murder of 23-year-old Sharon Raj, was awarded the death sentence.

With this, Greeshma has become the youngest-ever woman death row prisoner in Kerala. The judgement, however, has polarised Kerala society. While some have celebrated the death penalty as justice served, others argue that the punishment is disproportionate and have called for the abolition of capital punishment.

Judge A M Basheer, who delivered the death sentence, agreed with the prosecution that it was one of the “rarest of the rare cases”. Though the case was built on circumstantial evidence, he stated Greeshma deserved capital punishment, relying on her digital footprint for the sentencing.

“In a metaphorical way of saying, the God in the cloud saved the data of crime,” the judge remarked.

Noting that many events pointed to premeditation, he described Sharon’s murder as “extremely brutal, gruesome, diabolical, and revolting”.

Greeshma and Sharon were in a relationship, which the former wished to end in 2022. Sharon, however, was allegedly unwilling to part ways. It was alleged that Greeshma initially gave Sharon mango juice mixed with heavy doses of paracetamol, which he refused to drink due to its bitter taste.

Later, on October 14, 2022, when Greeshma called Sharon over to her house, and allegedly offered him an ‘Ayurvedic tonic’. He started throwing up the same day. His condition deteriorated within 24 hours.

illus | nikhil p a
illus | nikhil p a

According to reports, he suffered irreversible damage to his liver, kidney and lungs after consuming the poisonous concoction, which was prepared by mixing paraquat, a herbicide, with the tonic. He died of multiple organ failure 11 days later.

The judge highlighted that the crime instilled fear and psychosis in the public. Reports quoted him as saying that Greeshma’s act “desecrated the sanctity of love, sending a disturbing message to society”.

“It gave a message that a lover cannot be trusted,” he stated.

“Being an attempt of murder earlier and murder later, after breaching trust and love, is a rarest of rare case and hence the convict must be given capital punishment.”

In India, the death penalty is awarded only in the ‘rarest of rare’ cases. However, the definition of ‘rarest of rare’ is often subject to varying interpretations.

In 1983, the Supreme Court judgement in Machhi Singh vs State of Punjab laid down specific criteria for this, such as the manner of murder, motives, and proportionality of the crime. Examples included multiple murders, or if the victim was a child, a helpless woman, an infirm or elderly person, or a public figure, etc.

According to a public prosecutor, who prefers to remain anonymous, the ‘crime test’ and ‘criminal test’ are essential in determining whether a murder qualifies as ‘rarest of rare’.

“Either the crime has to be so gruesome, or the accused should be a repeat offender who poses a danger to society and is unlikely to reform even after imprisonment,” he says.

TNIE speaks to experts about the case.

R Sreelekha IPS, former DGP

I am not against capital punishment in the ‘rarest of the rare’ cases, but I don’t believe the 24-year-old woman convicted of murder (Greeshma) deserves it. There are guidelines on when to award capital punishment. The RG Kar case called for the death sentence, but, surprisingly, it was not given. The Greeshma case verdict is being celebrated by many here at a time when there are efforts to bring back murder accused convicted in courts abroad. This shows the double standards of society here.

Rekha Raj, writer and activist

A developed country should never allow death penalty. What the state should do is provide a mechanism to reform such people. In recent times, some courts have been trying to please the masses, that’s not the court’s job. Justice is not about pleasing the crowd. I don’t think this verdict will stand scrutiny in higher courts. Yes, Sharon’s family is going through an incredible loss. However, does a death penalty actually give them justice? As a society, we should also discuss how to address the financial and socio-cultural angles in such crimes.

Adv Sandhya Raju George

In this case, the death penalty was imposed on circumstantial grounds and presumptions. There is no conclusive evidence. Greeshma’s relationship and premarital sexual intimacy with the deceased have been used to frame her as an evil woman. There was a strong assumption about the ‘unofficial’ marriage they had reportedly entered into. Mobile phone records have been interpreted to show her in a negative light. And it is particularly glaring when the judgement of the Kolkata R G Kar Hospital Rape case, a brutal rape and murder that resulted in nationwide protests, also came on the same day – a lower court judge restrained from capital punishment, stating the case did not qualify as the ‘rarest of the rare’.

K Jayakumar, former chief secretary

The relevance of capital punishment in a civilised society is what I would like to flag. I believe in reformative correctional measures. Every human, however heinous a criminal, should be given a chance to correct oneself. Our correctional methods should incorporate that mechanism, rather than resort to ‘an eye for an eye’ approach, which will only render the whole society blind. Nobody is born a criminal.

Kemal Pasha, former High Court justice

The number of death penalties has increased steeply in recent times. The murder has to be the ‘rarest of the rare’ to be awarded death sentence. That means a lesser alternative should be unquestionably foreclosed. And for that, there should be substantial facts supporting the case. Also, the accused should not be too young or too old. But in this case, the accused is a first-time offenderl. Ultimately, what was the motive? She wanted to break up, but he wouldn’t allow that. If you look at the judgment, it is mentioned that she had tried to end the relationship on the same day she gave him the concoction. Looking at earlier SC verdicts, this case can never be seen as ‘rarest of the rare’.

Adv J Sandhya

The principle of our criminal law is that life (life imprisonment) is a rule and death is an exception. This judgement is an antithesis of that. We can see that the court was swayed by the public sentiment and media trial. It appeared like playing to the gallery. Even those who support the judgement are saying that this verdict would be overturned in higher courts. However, the casual approach some courts have been taking towards death penalty of late is scary. This sets a bad trend. For some, nothing but capital punishment is acceptable for a case that has been through a media trial. The court shouldn’t succumb to public sentiment.

Rishiraj Singh IPS, former DGP

This talk against capital punishment is unwarranted. It’s not about being civilised or uncivilised, but more about the gravity of the crime. Look at the RG Kar case, and how there are conflicting opinions about the verdict. When the case is ‘rarest of the rare’, the verdict also has to be in accordance with that. All those who say it isn’t humane should be asked what if the victim were close to them. Would they still say the same? Also, the court must have considered the punishment as a deterrent to such crimes.

Related Stories

No stories found.

X
The New Indian Express
www.newindianexpress.com