The Indore bench of the Madhya Pradesh High Court recently reduced the life sentence of a rape convict to 20 years’ rigorous imprisonment considering the fact that he was kind enough to leave the survivor alive without taking her life [Ramu v State of MP].
A bench of Justices Subodh Abhyankar and Satyendra Kumar Singh while partially allowing the appeal observed that,
“Considering the demonic act of the appellant who appears to have no respect for the dignity of a woman and has the propensity to commit sexual offence even with a girl child aged 4 years, this Court does not find it to be a fit case where the sentence can be reduced to the sentence already undergone by him.”
However, further noting the fact that rape convict was kind enough to leave the prosecutrix alive, the Court was of the opinion that the life imprisonment could be reduced to 20 years’ rigorous imprisonment.
The appeal against conviction was preferred by the appellant Ramu @ Ramsingh against the judgement passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Indore which had convicted the appellant for committing rape on a girl under twelve years of age under the Indian Penal Code.
The appellant-convict in the case used to live in a tent near the hut of the survivor.
It was the prosecution case that when the grandmother of the girl went to answer the call of nature, the girl also went behind her.
It was alleged that the appellant called victim into his tent on the pretext of giving her a rupee. Thereafter, when the grandmother heard the cries of the vgirl, she tried to call for help. The father of girl came out and heard his daughter’s cries from the tent of appellant.
When he entered the tent, he saw his daughter lying on the ground bleeding and the appellant naked. The appellant ran away from the spot soon after he saw the survivor’s father entering the tent.
The girl informed the father about whole incident and when she was taken to the hospital for examination, the doctor also confirmed rape.
A case was registered against the appellant for rape under the Indian Penal Code read with Section 3(1)12 of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.
Thereafter, investigation ensued and the charge sheet was filed. It was committed to the trial court which after recording evidence convicted the appellant and sentenced him to life imprisonment.
The counsel for appellant argued that, it was not a case where the sentence of life imprisonment can be awarded and highlighted that he has been in jail since 2007, completing around 15 years of incarceration. Therefore, the appellant requested that his sentence may be reduced to the sentence already undergone.
The State counsel stated that no the trial court had correctly appreciated the evidence and, therefore, the convict was undeserving of any leniency in sentencing.
The Court majorly relied on prosecution witnesses evidences and medical report by the doctor who examined the victim, to conclude that the guilt of the appellant was proved beyond reasonable doubt.
However, it reduced the sentence to 20 years jail term from life imprisonment.
“Considering the fact that he was kind enough to leave the prosecutrix alive, this court is of the opinion that the life imprisonment can be reduced to 20 years’ rigorous imprisonment,” the Court said.
Advocate Sharmila Sharma represented appellant while advocate Sudanshu Vyas appeared for State.
Source Link
