The Supreme Court of India

INDIA: SUPREME COURT COMMUTES RAPIST'S DEATH PENALTY TO LIFE IN PRISON WITHOUT REMISSION

July 28, 2025:

The Supreme Court of India on July 16, 2025 commuted a man's death penalty in a minor's rape and murder case to life in prison without remission.
A bench of Justices Vikram Nath, Sanjay Karol and Sandeep Mehta observed the trial court and the Uttarakhand High Court only commented on the "brutality of the crime" to hand down the death penalty.
In its July 16 verdict, the bench said, "No other circumstance came to be discussed by the courts in reaching the conclusion that the case forms part of the 'rarest of the rare' category. Such an approach in our view cannot be sustained."
The convict in the apex court challenged a January 2020 high court order confirming his conviction and capital punishment.
According to the prosecution, the man raped and murdered a 10-year-old minor girl in July 2018 after luring her into his hut on the pretext of buying sweets.
"A simple afternoon of play and frolic with family members yielded catastrophic results for a 10-year-old female child. The most innocent desire of either a candy or a toy was exploited in the worst manner possible by the appellant," the top court said.
The man was stated to have lured innocent children to his dwelling, taken "his pick from among them" and let the others go.
The bench noted the prosecution's case relied on recovery of the victim's body from the convict's hut, last seen theory and DNA evidence.
While refusing to interfere with the findings of conviction against the man saying the prosecution has proven its case against him beyond reasonable doubt, the bench was "conscious of the brutality of crime".
"Thereafter, to hide the evidence of his crime, the child was strangulated by hand, in a defenseless condition," it added.
The bench said the courts below had failed to make any detailed reference to the aggravating and mitigating circumstances surrounding the appellant.
"Moreover, the high court, which was the reference court for confirmation of death sentence, though expounded on the requirement of law to consider aggravating and mitigating circumstances, failed to consider any of these circumstances - only dealing with the brutality of the incident," it said.
The bench referred to the reports of the probation officer, jail administration and psychological evaluation of the appellant.
It said as per report of the district probation officer, Ayodhya, the condition of the convict's family was "very pathetic" and they earned their livelihood by doing labour work.
It said the psychological report stated that the appellant could not attend school due to socio-economic condition of the family and had started working at the age of 12.
"Taking into account the above mitigating circumstances and the threshold of 'rarest of rare' category, we deem it appropriate to award life imprisonment without remission extending to the natural life of the appellant instead of the punishment of the death penalty," the top court held.