New Delhi, India
The Supreme Court has commuted the death sentence of a man convicted of sexually abusing and murdering his six-year-old stepdaughter to life imprisonment. However, the court made it clear that he will not be entitled to ordinary remission or early release and will have to remain in prison for the rest of his natural life.
A bench comprising Justices Vikram Nath, Sandeep Mehta, and Vijay Bishnoi, in a 157-page judgment, found the testimony of the victim’s mother credible. The court made an important observation that a woman’s failure to immediately report domestic violence or sexual abuse cannot, by itself, be a reason to doubt her testimony.
Trial Court Had Awarded Death Sentence
The Sessions Court had sentenced the stepfather to death for repeatedly sexually abusing the six-year-old girl and subsequently strangling her to death. The Indore Bench of the Madhya Pradesh High Court upheld the trial court’s verdict in November 2019.
The convict subsequently challenged the High Court judgment before the Supreme Court. His counsel argued that the victim’s mother was the only eyewitness and that she had not reported the crime for a considerable period. Therefore, it was argued that her testimony should be viewed with suspicion.
The Supreme Court rejected this argument.
Woman’s Silence Cannot Be Treated as Complicity
The bench observed that the silence of a woman who has experienced domestic violence or sexual abuse cannot be considered abnormal. The court noted that women in such circumstances may be unable to report abuse because of various social, economic, and family-related factors.
The bench referred to data from NFHS-5, noting that according to the survey conducted between 2019 and 2021, around 29.3% of married women aged 18 to 49 reported experiencing physical or sexual violence by their husbands. Nearly three-fourths of these women had not sought help from anyone.
The court said there can be no single predetermined model for assessing the conduct of a victim or witness. Delay in reporting an offence, by itself, cannot be treated as sufficient grounds to reject testimony as false.
Life Imprisonment for the Rest of Natural Life
The bench also considered the circumstances of the victim’s mother. According to the court, she had been widowed after her first marriage and had no independent source of income. Following her second marriage, she entered a domestic environment in which her freedom was restricted.
The court described the offence as extremely serious and involving grave circumstances. However, after considering certain mitigating circumstances in favour of the convict and the possibility of his reform, the bench decided to commute the death sentence to life imprisonment.
The bench made it clear that the life sentence would continue for the convict’s remaining natural life. The court also noted that the mother’s testimony was corroborated by medical evidence and phone records.
