BY:- SHABBIR LIMKHEDAWALA
In the Supreme Court of India
| NAME OF THE CASE | Shyam Narain vs. State of Delhi NCT |
| CITATION | Criminal Appeal no. 1860 of 2010 |
| DATE OF THE CASE | 15th May, 2013 |
| APPELLANT | Shyam Narain |
| RESPONDENT | State of Delhi NCT |
| BENCH/JUDGE | J. B S Chauhan and J. Dipak Misra |
| STATUTES/CONSTITUTION INVOLVED | Constitution of India; Indian Penal Code |
| IMPORTANT SECTIONS/ARTICLES | Article 132 of Indian Constitution; Section 375 & 376 of Indian Penal Code. |
ABSTRACT:
The case deals with a brutal and heinous matter of rape against an 8 year old girl. The offender Shyam Narain, lured into the victim’s house when she was alone and brutally raped her to an extent where she was bleeding from her private parts. He also threatened her to kill if she disclosed it to anyone.
The child suffered trauma and severe pain for almost 6 days in the hospital and then finally told her parents about the incident. The Accused was then arrested and punished with rigorous life imprisonment under section 376(2) of the Indian Penal Code. The accused then approached Delhi High Court, but the court upheld the decision of the trial judge. Finally, the accused approached the Supreme Court for reducing the sentence on the ground that he has 4 children and life imprisonment would endanger the life of his 4 children. Hence, he pleaded to be sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for a term of 10 years under section 376(2) of the Indian Penal Code, which was denied by the Supreme Court on the ground that the crime committed by him was of heinous nature and it would not be just if the punishment would be reduced as the crime has affected the dignity and purity of an 8-year-old girl child. The Supreme Court upheld the judgment given by the High Court and dismissed the petition.
INTRODUCTION
The case is an appeal filed by the accused before the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India for reduction of sentence, passed by the trial court and upheld by the High Court of Delhi under Section 376(2)(f) of the Indian Penal Code.
In the given case, the accused is sentenced to rigorous life imprisonment by the trial judge and the decision is upheld by the High Court of Delhi. The offender has then moved to the Supreme Court for reduction of the sentence from rigorous life imprisonment to imprisonment for 10 years on the ground of poverty and having a sentence to life imprisonment would endanger the life of his 4 children.
BACKGROUND OF THE CASE
Rape is a heinous offence against a woman’s integrity and purity. The offence not only has a negative effect on the victim’s physical body, but it also has a negative impact on the victim’s mental health. Every year, the number of rape cases reported in India rises dramatically. Furthermore, the number of cases of rape against children has risen much faster. Children are considerably more vulnerable and emotionally unprepared to process such a heinous crime against them. Rape takes away a woman’s entire life, and in the instance of a small child or girl, they endure the most extreme trauma at such a young age, as well as a terror for the rest of their lives.
The Case is of the brutal rape of an eight-year-old girl. The sensitive learned trial Judge had taken note of the brutality meted out to the child and sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs.5000/- after recording his conviction under Section 376(2)(f) of the Indian Penal Code.
Furthermore, the High Court considered a number of facts in the appeal, including the child’s health, the discovery of the accused’s terrible treatment, the conditions under which the FIR was filed, the prosecutrix evidence about how she was raped in a brutal way by the accused, the absence of any purpose for his arriving at the victim’s residence, and the conditions in which he came across the injured child, the doctors’ testimony which indicated the victim’s physical state and the accused’s behaviour in the hospital, and on that basis, agreed with the learned trial Judge’s conclusion.
FACTS OF THE CASE
On the 28th of September, 2003, the victim (8 years old prosecutrix) was alone at her place when her parents had gone to meet her maternal uncle. The accused used the opportunity and lured into the victim’s house, gave her some intoxicating drink and raped her. He also threatened to inflict knife strikes on her and her family members if she told her parents or anybody else. He also warned her to inform her parents about the injuries she had when she slid into the toilet. Her testimony also revealed that the accused drove her to the hospital while she was bleeding profusely from her private parts. Dr Anju Yadav, the treating doctor, was doubtful of what was being said to her. As a result, the duty policeman alerted the local police station, P.S. Kalyanpuri, about the little girl’s admission and condition. After six days in the hospital, the child was discharged. The worried mother, unable to digest the daughter’s narrative, urged her to tell her the truth.
Later, the victim broke down before her mother and narrated the whole scenario. As per treating doctors, the hymen of the victim was torn and evidence of sexual assault on her was positive. The father went to the police and told them what his daughter had told him, and a FIR was filed. The investigative agency apprehended the accused, and then he was subsequently taken up for trial. The accused claimed to be innocent and wanted to be tried. Appellant failed to disclose the reason for his presence in the victim’s house and under what circumstances he took her to the hospital. The trial Judge had taken note of the brutality meted out to the child and sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs.5000/- under section 376(2)(f) of the Indian Penal Code. The High Court of Delhi upheld the decision given by the trial judge.
ISSUE RAISED BEFORE THE COURT
- Is Shyam Narain (accused) guilty of committing the offence of rape against the eight-year-old girl?
- The appeal was raised before the Supreme Court by the accused to reduce the sentence of rigorous imprisonment for life to a lesser sentence under Section 376(2)(f) of the Indian Penal Code.
ARGUMENTS FROM THE APPELANT SIDE
- The Learned Counsel of the Appellant (accused) submitted before the Supreme Court, that the appellant is a father of four children and their lives would be ruined if the sentence of imprisonment for life is affirmed. Also, the other ground that is urged is the background of impecuniosity.
- Though Section 376(2) provides that sentence can be rigorous imprisonment for life, yet on reasonable ground, the court can establish a punishment for a term not less than ten years. Hence, it is urged by the appellant to reduce the punishment to ten years of rigorous imprisonment.
ARGUMENTS FROM THE RESPONDENT SIDE
- The Learned Counsel for the state, Mr Paras Kuhad, and Mr B.V. Balram Das submitted that as a result of the horrific nature of the act, the punishment imposed on the accused is fully justifiable and does not require any intervention. They further contended that a sentence reduction in such a situation would be contrary to the principle of just punishment.
- Though Section 376(2) provides that sentence can be rigorous imprisonment for life, yet on reasonable ground, the court can establish a punishment for a term not less than ten years. Hence, it is urged by the appellant to reduce the punishment to ten years of rigorous imprisonment.
- The primary purpose of sentence imposition is for the accused to recognize that the crime he committed has left not just a stain on his life but also a void in the societal fabric. Also, Just punishment is to guarantee that individuals in society, who ultimately make up the collective, do not suffer as a result of such offences on a regular basis.
- The learned cousin referred to the case of Jameel vs State of UP, where the court stated that when it comes to the notion of sentencing, it is the responsibility of every court to impose a suitable punishment, taking into account the gravity of the offence and the way in which it was committed.
- Also referring to Madan Gopal Kakkad v. Naval Dubey & Ors, though not all sexual attacks on female children are registered, still there is an alarming and disturbing increase in sexual offences against minors. This is because children are unaware of the act of rape and are unable to defend themselves, making them easy prey for lustful brutes who execute the unscrupulous, deceptive, and devious art of manipulating female infants and young girls. As a result, criminals who pose a threat to civilized society should be punished ruthlessly and relentlessly in the harshest terms possible.
- As it can be seen, numerous themes have been focused on, including the seriousness of the offence, the way in which it was committed, the influence on society, the ramifications on the victim, and the proportionality of punishment. In the present case, the rigorous life imprisonment is justified in the event of a rape performed on an eight-year-old child who was helpless, defenceless, and, in some ways, unfortunate.
RELATED PROVISIONS
- According to the definition of “Rape” given under Section 375 of the Indian Penal Code, A man is said to commit “rape” who has sexual intercourse with a woman under circumstances falling under any of the six following descriptions:
- Against her will.
- Without her consent.
- With her consent, when her consent has been obtained by putting her or any person in whom she is interested in fear of death or of hurt.
- With her consent, when the man knows that he is not her husband and that her consent is given because she believes that he is another man to whom she is or believes herself to be lawfully married.
- With her consent, when, at the time of giving such consent, by reason of unsoundness of mind or intoxication or the administration by him personally or through another of any stupefying or unwholesome substance, she is unable to understand the nature and consequences of that to which she gives consent.
- With or without her consent, when she is under sixteen years of age. Explanation.—Penetration is sufficient to constitute the sexual intercourse necessary to the offence of rape.
- Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code provides the Punishment for committing the offence of “Rape”. Clause (1), states that whoever commits rape shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which shall not be less than seven years but which may be for life or for a term which may extend to ten years and shall also be liable to fine.
- If the women raped is his own wife and is not under twelve years of age, he shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to two years or with a fine or with both.
- It is also provided that the court may, for adequate and special reasons to be mentioned in the judgment, impose a sentence of imprisonment for a term of fewer than seven years.
- In section 376 (2) (f) of the Indian Penal Code, defines the committing of rape on a woman when she is under twelve years of age.
- In clause (2) of the section, special cases are provided including gang rape or rape done by a police officer, etc. In such cases, the offender is to be punished with rigorous imprisonment for a term which shall not be less than ten years but which may be for life and shall also be liable to a fine. However, that the Court may impose a sentence of imprisonment of either sort for a term of fewer than ten years for appropriate and exceptional reasons to be stated in the judgment. to be dealt with punishment in case of any provisions indicated in the section.
JUDGMENT
It is to be noted that the law, although imposing a minimum punishment of 10 years, also allows for the sentence to be prolonged up to life. The legislature has delegated it to the Court’s discretion. The Supreme Court has been expressing its sorrow and anguish at the growing prevalence of crime against women for over three decades. The dignity and purity of the 8 year old girl’s physical body were destroyed, who was expected to spend her time cheerfully. The child’s condition and the shock she endured are easily visualized.
Also considering that she will be haunted by the thought of a heavy crush of calamity, which will always echo the chill air of the past, driving her to a condition of nightmare melancholia. She may not be able to establish her womanhood due to no fault of her own.
Though the grounds laid down by the appellant were intended to entice mercy, but the Court is inclined to believe that the factual matrix will not enable the rainbow of kindness to prevail. Hence, the Court maintained the sentence of rigorous imprisonment for life and, and sustained the judgment of conviction and the order of sentence passed by the High Court.
It is to be noted that the law, although imposing a minimum punishment of 10 years, also allows for the sentence to be prolonged up to life. The legislature has delegated it to the Court’s discretion. The Supreme Court has been expressing its sorrow and anguish at the growing prevalence of crime against women for over three decades. The dignity and purity of the 8 year old girl’s physical body were destroyed, who was expected to spend her time cheerfully. The child’s condition and the shock she endured are easily visualized.
Also considering that she will be haunted by the thought of a heavy crush of calamity, which will always echo the chill air of the past, driving her to a condition of nightmare melancholia. She may not be able to establish her womanhood due to no fault of her own.
Though the grounds laid down by the appellant were intended to entice mercy, but the Court is inclined to believe that the factual matrix will not enable the rainbow of kindness to prevail. Hence, the Court maintained the sentence of rigorous imprisonment for life and sustained the judgment of conviction and the order of sentence passed by the High Court.
CONCLUSION & ANALYSIS
Children tend to feel reluctant to discuss sexual abuse or rape with their parents. They may hesitate to bring up the subject, or they may wait months or years to report a rape or abuse. Children suppress information for a variety of reasons, including threats of damage to themselves or family members, extreme humiliation, or an inaccurate but widespread belief that they must be in danger.
The case above brings out the significance of Court’s discretionary power as well as the factual and important factors need to be acknowledged by the Court while dealing with such critical matters.
The author is in favour of the judgment passed by the Supreme Court & High Court. The learned counsel from the state clearly stated that reducing the sentence of the criminal would not be in the favour of a just punishment. But, the learned counsel could have also raised other factual data and penal laws provided under Indian Penal Code.
Section 328 of Indian Penal Code, lays down punishment for imprisonment of not more than 10 years with fine to whoever administers any person any poison or any stupefying, intoxicating or unwholesome drug, with intent to commit or to facilitate the commission of an offence. According to the facts of the case, it clearly states that the accused had intoxicated the minor girl before raping her.
Also, according to Section 503 & 507 of the Indian Penal Code which provides the definition and punishment for offenders committing offence of criminal intimidation, which basically refers to threaten someone with injury or death to any person or to any other person in relation with him/her to cause the person to do any act or to omit any act that should be done by him or her. Such offenders shall be punished with imprisonment up to 7 years or with fine or both. In the present case, the accused had threatened the minor girl not to reveal regarding the incident of rape happened with her, or else she and her family members were to be killed to death.
Although, the plea filed by the accused had relevant grounds for reducing the sentence. But, the Supreme Court correctly passed down the judgement considering the physical and mental damages suffered by the victim immediately as well as the long term trauma that she has to suffer for the rest of her life due to the brutal offence committed against her by the accused.
