The Punjab and Haryana High Court has made a significant ruling in a harrowing 2018 case, commuting the death sentence of a man convicted for the rape and murder of a five-and-a-half-year-old girl to rigorous imprisonment for the rest of his natural life, with no possibility of remission. In a parallel decision, the court acquitted the convict's mother, who had been sentenced to seven years by a trial court, observing her actions stemmed from a misguided attempt to protect her 'Raja beta' (royal son).
The Crime and the Court's Rationale for Commutation
The brutal incident occurred on May 31, 2018, in Palwal, Haryana. The victim, precisely five years, seven months, and fourteen days old, was the daughter of the convict's employer. The convict, who worked for the girl's father in a tent installation business, had gone to fetch lunch. Upon his return, the young girl accompanied him. Seizing an opportunity when her father was napping, the man took the child to his residence.
There, he raped the minor and then stabbed her multiple times with a kitchen knife. He concealed her body in a container used for storing flour. Medical evidence was conclusive, with the postmortem report detailing tears to her clitoris and hymen, and multiple stab wounds, including one that pierced her liver.
A bench comprising Justice Anoop Chitkara, while upholding the conviction, commuted the death penalty. The court reasoned that the murder was an act of panic to destroy evidence of the rape, not a premeditated killing. Surveying Supreme Court precedents, the bench emphasized that life imprisonment is the rule and the death penalty an exception, requiring consideration of reform and rehabilitation.
The verdict stated, "To save the other kids and females, the convict must stay inside the four walls of the prison until he is closer to the sunset of his virility... we are convinced to impose a sentence of 30 years, without remission." This sentence, the court held, would "safeguard the other girls on the street from the pervertedness of the convict."
Acquittal of the Mother: 'Blind Love' for a 'Raja Beta'
In a striking part of the judgment, the High Court acquitted the convict's mother, who had been found guilty by the trial court for obstructing the search. Villagers testified that she resisted their entry and switched off the electricity when they tried to search the house.
However, the High Court found no admissible evidence of her active participation in the crime or an intent to conceal evidence. The judges made poignant observations about her conduct, linking it to a deep-seated social malaise. "Unfortunately, in this part of India, family members, especially mothers, often have such blind love for their precious sons that, no matter how imperfect or villainous they might be, they are still regarded as Raja Betas," the bench noted.
The court described this mindset as a reflection of a deeply embedded patriarchal attitude, where the mother "prioritized shielding her son instead of informing the police or seeking justice for the girl." Yet, the judgment concluded, "Her only fault is that she was trying to protect her Raja-beta, for which she cannot be punished under the Indian Penal Code." Her maternal love, the court said, "overrode her sense of justice."
Unbroken Chain of Circumstantial Evidence
The court upheld the conviction based on a solid chain of circumstantial evidence:
- Villagers saw the convict leading the girl by hand towards his house.
- He gave a false explanation to her father about dropping her elsewhere.
- The child's body was recovered from a drum inside his house compound.
- Bloodstains on the drum and a nearby stone matched the victim's DNA profile.
While the forensic analysis did not find the victim's DNA on the convict's clothes or detect semen on swabs, the court ruled these gaps were not fatal given the overwhelming strength of the other evidence. The age of the victim, established by her birth certificate, and the medical findings were undisputed.
The December 23 verdict underscores the judiciary's nuanced approach to sentencing, balancing the gravity of the crime, the potential for reform, and the need to protect society. It also delivers a sharp commentary on the social biases that can obstruct justice, even as it absolves a mother acting under their influence.
