The Apex Court commuted the death sentence of the convict in the case of Sambhubhai Raisangbhai Padiyar v. State of Gujarat for proven murder and sexual assault of a four-year-old minor boy. A three-judge bench of Justice BR Gavai, Justice Aravind Kumar, and Justice KV Viswanathan ordered the appellant to undergo rigorous imprisonment of twenty-five years without remission. The Supreme Court made this decision overruling the order of the death penalty imposed on the convict earlier by the High Court of Gujrat for offenses stated under sections 302, 364, and 377 of the Indian Penal Code along with section 4 and section 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (POCSO).
Dead body of a naked 4-year-old boy discovered in 2016
In 2016, the child that was murdered was shortly seen with the convict before going missing. The convict had cajoled the child to go out for an ice cream with him, from the custody of the child’s aunt. The man did not make an effort to explain any reasons for the child’s absence, nor did he have a valid explanation for it.
The naked corpse of the child was discovered behind the dargah, near a lake, with the presence of injuries around the genitals and anal region, and had been murdered by strangulation, according to the postmortem reports. The Supreme Court opted for a holistic approach while dealing with this matter and referred to the ‘Mitigation Investigation Report.’ The report highlighted that the accused suffered from moderate-intensity psychotic features, intellectual disability and also had tuberculosis meningitis in his early childhood.
The case does not fall among the ‘rarest of rare cases’ despite its heinous nature
The accused had been deserted by his wife and had maintained familial ties with his mother, who was also responsible for looking after his 10-year-old daughter. The Supreme Court reduced the death sentence of the accused to a sentence of rigorous punishment for 25 years, as the court was of the opinion that the possibility of reformation cannot be completely ruled out in this case. The court held that a normal life term of 14 years would be inadequate and grossly disproportionate for such a diabolical crime. The court came to a decision that 25 years of rigorous punishment would be proportionate given the nature of the crime and prevent the confidence of people towards the legal system from being jeopardized.
The court concluded that the case of Sambhubhai Raisangbhai Padiyar did not fall within the purview of ‘rarest of the rare’ cases. The report from the Hospital for Mental Health indicates a feeling of remorse in the convict while the Supreme Court maintained its decision that 25 years of rigorous imprisonment without remission would be ‘a just dessert’.
