High Court reduces sentence in rape case

Convict suffers from ‘treatable’ psychiatric illness, says medical board report

November 07, 2017 01:33 am | Updated 01:33 am IST - New Delhi

The Delhi High Court has reduced the sentence of a rape accused from 10 years in imprisonment to seven years keeping in view of his psychiatric illness and his being in custody since his arrest.

“The appellant [convict Dilip Kumar] has been in custody since the date of his arrest. As per the report of the medical board, the appellant suffers from psychiatric illness in the form of moderate depressive episodes, which in scientific terms is a ‘treatable’ and ‘not curable’ clinical condition subject to regular treatment. In the given facts and circumstances, it would meet the ends of justice if the appellant is sentenced to the minimum sentence of seven years for committing the offence punishable under Section 376 [rape] IPC,” Justice Pratibha Rani said.

Lower court order

In his appeal, the convict had challenged the lower court verdict sentencing him to 10 years in jail for sexually assaulting a 16-year-old girl, submitting that she had voluntarily established physical relations with him during their 28 days together. The prosecutrix was 16 when she left her house to marry him.

“Counsel for the appellant does not dispute that the appellant was already married at the time when the prosecutrix accompanied him to marry... and that he did not disclose the factum of being already married and having a son. In these circumstances though the prosecutrix who had attained the consenting age was consenting party but the consent was given under misconception of fact, the appellant is convicted for committing the offence punishable under Section 376 IPC,” the Court said.

“It is apparent from the record that the appellant played fraud with the prosecutrix and took her along with him by luring her and telling her that he would marry her without disclosing that he was already married and also had a son aged about 6 years. He could not legally conduct a second marriage. It is settled that consent obtained by deceit is no consent and in the present case it is apparent that the consent of the prosecutrix, was obtained by fraud and deceit,” it said.

0 / 0
Sign in to unlock member-only benefits!
  • Access 10 free stories every month
  • Save stories to read later
  • Access to comment on every story
  • Sign-up/manage your newsletter subscriptions with a single click
  • Get notified by email for early access to discounts & offers on our products
Sign in

Comments

Comments have to be in English, and in full sentences. They cannot be abusive or personal. Please abide by our community guidelines for posting your comments.

We have migrated to a new commenting platform. If you are already a registered user of The Hindu and logged in, you may continue to engage with our articles. If you do not have an account please register and login to post comments. Users can access their older comments by logging into their accounts on Vuukle.