CUTTACK: The Orissa High Court has directed the senior superintendent, Circle Jail, Cuttack at Choudwar to submit reports on the past life, psychological conditions, post-conviction conduct and such other matters on two convicts who were awarded death sentence for rape and murder of a six-year-old girl.
The direction assumes significance as it is for the first time that the Orissa High Court has passed such an order while considering a death reference. The high court expected the jail official to obtain the reports by taking service and necessary assistance from the probation officer and such other officers including a psychologist or jail doctor or any medical officer attending the prison. The convicts have been also given an opportunity to furnish such data in the shape of affidavits.
The minor girl was kidnapped while she was on her way back home after buying chocolates from a shop. She was gagged and gang raped in an abandoned house near the village and killed to destroy evidence. The incident occurred at a village under Tirtol police station on August 21, 2014.
After trial in the case, the court of Additional District & Sessions Judge (Fast Track Court-POCSO), Jagatsinghpur convicted Sk Asif Ali (36) and Sk Akil Ali (35) on November 21, 2022 and imposed death penalty on them as it felt it came under the ‘rarest of rare’ category of crimes. While the death sentence was sent by the state government to the high court for confirmation, the two convicts also filed criminal appeals against the trial court verdict.
The high court issued the direction on Thursday after taking note of the state government counsel Bibhu Prasad Tripathy’s submission that the trial court awarded the death sentence on the same day it convicted the two appellants.
The division bench of Justice SK Sahoo and Justice RK Patnaik said, “Such an exercise is considered to be absolutely expedient in order to advance the cause of justice, the intent and purpose being to provide a fair amount of opportunity for the appellants to bring on record all such mitigating circumstances to be weighed against the aggravating circumstances since a balance is to be struck while taking a final decision on sentence in juxtaposition to the sentences imposed by the trial court.”
The bench felt there has been no proper and meaningful hearing as such which is necessary in order to do complete justice. “In fact, there appears to be no opportunity afforded to the appellants to submit any such material in support of the mitigating circumstances during and in course of hearing on the question of sentence,” the bench observed.
While citing Supreme Court orders, the bench said, “Law is well-settled that hearing on the question of sentence has to be real and effective and not a mere formality; if a meaningful hearing is not taken up by a court while considering the sentence to be imposed and inflicted upon the convict, it is likely to cause severe prejudice to him.”