The Madras High Court Bench here has commuted from 10 to seven years the sentence imposed on a 23-year-old youth for kidnapping a 17-year-old girl from Tuticorin to Chennai and having sexual intercourse on the false promise of marrying her.
Partly allowing a criminal appeal filed by the youngster, Justice S. Nagamuthu modified the provisions under which he was convicted and held him guilty under Section 363 (kidnapping) of the Indian Penal Code as well as Section 4 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, 2012.
Further, while deciding the sentence to be imposed on him, the judge said that it was a settled law that before fixing the quantum of punishment in a criminal case, courts should always strike a balance between aggravating circumstances and mitigating circumstances.
“The aggravating circumstances relate to the crime and the mitigating circumstances relate to the criminal. In this case, so far as the aggravating circumstances are concerned, it has been confirmed that a minor girl was kidnapped and she was sexually exploited.
“The wound caused to the girl is not only to the body but also to the mind of the victim as well as her family members. The stigma which she is going to carry forever is not erasable. Thus, the aggravating circumstances are so grave in nature,” he said.
Discussing the mitigating circumstances, the judge pointed out that the convict was hardly 23 years at the time of crime that took place in December 2014 and there was every possibility for reformation since he was not involved in any other crime since then.
“However, the statue under Section 4 of the POCSO Act prescribes a minimum punishment for a term of seven years with fine. When the intention of the legislature is to impose such a stringent punishment… this court has no option but to impose it,” the judge said.
Insofar as the conviction under Section 363 of IPC was concerned, the judge ordered that it would be sufficient to sentence him to one year of rigorous imprisonment which shall be undergone concurrently along with the seven years imposed for the major offence.
The appeal was filed against the decision of Tuticorin Mahila Court which had convicted the appellant under Section 366A (procuring a minor girl) of IPC and Section 4 of the POCSO Act on March 13 this year and sentenced him to 10 years of imprisonment for each of the two offences.
Courts must strike a balance between aggravating and mitigating circumstances, says judge
