Sentence/Sentencing: Death sentence – For killing a minor child – Held: The offence committed was brutal, but did not warrant death sentence as the accused was not a previous convict or a professional killer – At the time of commission of offence, he was
22 years of age – His jail conduct was also reported to be good – Mitigating circumstances being in favour of the appellant, in the interest of justice, death sentence is commuted to life imprisonment. Partly allowing the appeal, the Court
HELD: Striking the balance between the aggravating and mitigating circumstances, mitigating circumstances are in favour of the accused while commuting the death sentence to life imprisonment. The mitigating circumstances in favour of the accused are that : the accused at the time of commission of the offence was aged of 22 years; that, by now, he has spent 18 years in the jail; that, while in jail, his conduct was good; that, the accused tried to become a civilized man and completed his graduation in B.A. from jail. He has tried to become reformative; that, from the poems, written by him in the jail, it appeared that he realised his mistake which was committed by him at the time when he was of young age and therefore he can be reformed and rehabilitated. These details show there was a possibility that accused would not commit similar criminal acts. That the accused would not be a continuing threat to the society. In the facts and circumstances of the case, the decision of capital punishment is not warranted. [Para 6.1, 7] [866-C-H]
Sunil v. State of Madhya Pradesh (2017) 4 SCC 393; Bachan Singh v. State of Punjab (1980) 2 SCC 684; Shyam Singh alias Bhima v. State of Madhya Pradesh (2017) 11 SCC 265 – relied on.
As published in the Supreme Court Reports, Supreme Court of India. Text from the Indian Supreme Court Judgments open data set (Dattam Labs), CC BY 4.0.
This page is for informational and research purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Consult a qualified advocate for advice specific to your situation.