By Tanishka Shah

In a landmark judgment, the Supreme Court commuted the death sentence of a man convicted of kidnapping, sexually assaulting, and murdering a four-year-old child. While upholding his conviction under Sections 302, 364, and 377 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and Sections 4 and 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, the Court replaced the death penalty with rigorous imprisonment for 25 years without remission.

The Court acknowledged the heinous nature of the crime but determined that it did not fall under the rarest of rare category, thereby justifying the commutation of the death sentence.

The convict was initially sentenced to death by the Trial Court, which found him guilty of luring the child with ice cream, committing aggravated sexual assault, and then strangling the victim to death. The Gujarat High Court upheld the conviction and death sentence. The convict then appealed to the Supreme Court, challenging the quantum of punishment.

Upon reviewing the post-mortem report, the Supreme Court reaffirmed that the child had suffered a homicidal death due to asphyxia by throttling. However, the Court also examined mitigating factors before making its final decision on the sentence.

The Supreme Court based its decision on the five golden principles of circumstantial evidence, as follows:

1. Last Seen Theory: The accused was last seen with the child before the murder. The law mandates that the accused must provide a plausible explanation for parting ways with the victim. In this case, no satisfactory explanation was given, strengthening the prosecution’s case.
2. Presence at the Crime Scene: Witnesses confirmed the convict’s presence near the crime scene, forming another strong link in the chain of circumstantial evidence.
3. Injuries on the Accused: The convict’s medical examination revealed injuries on his genitals, further substantiating allegations of sexual assault.
4. Conduct Under Section 8 of the Evidence Act: The convict led the police to hidden evidence, including the victim’s clothes, demonstrating his knowledge of the crime.
5. Matching of Blood Group: Forensic tests confirmed that the blood on the victim’s clothes and anal swabs matched the convict’s blood type, further implicating him.

Additionally, the Court invoked Sections 29 and 30 of the POCSO Act, which place the burden of proof on the accused in child sexual abuse cases. Since the convict failed to rebut the presumption of guilt, his conviction remained upheld.

While acknowledging the brutality of the crime, the Supreme Court considered several mitigating factors before deciding against capital punishment:

• The convict was 24 years old at the time of the crime.
• He had no prior criminal record.
• He came from a low socio-economic background.
• He was diagnosed with moderate psychotic features and intellectual disability, possibly stemming from tubercular meningitis in childhood.
• His prison conduct indicated a potential for reformation.

The Court ruled that the crime, although gruesome, did not meet the rarest of rare standard required for the death penalty. However, considering the severity of the offense, the Court held that regular life imprisonment (14 years) would be inadequate and instead imposed 25 years of rigorous imprisonment without remission.

This ruling reflects the Supreme Court’s nuanced approach to justice—balancing retributive and reformative principles in sentencing. While ensuring strict punishment for heinous crimes, the judgment also leaves room for rehabilitation where feasible.

By setting clear standards for circumstantial evidence, this case also strengthens legal precedents in child sexual abuse trials under the POCSO Act and IPC.

Case Title: SAMBHUBHAI RAISANGBHAI PADHIYAR v. STATE OF GUJARAT

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 1004

Click here to read/download the judgment.