The Bombay High Court on Monday upheld the constitutional validity of a section of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) under which life imprisonment or death penalty can be awarded to repeat offenders in rape cases.
A Division Bench of Justices B.P. Dharmadhikari and Revati Mohite-Dere was hearing criminal petitions filed by the convicts in the 2013 Shakti Mills gangrape case challenging the constitutional validity of Section 376E (punishment for repeat offenders) of the IPC under which they were sentenced to death by a sessions court.
Mohammad Salim Mohammad Kudus Ansari, Mohammad Kasim Mohammad Hasim Shaikh, and Vijay Yadav were convicted for gangraping an 18-year-old telephone operator inside the abandoned Shakti Mills compound on July 31, 2013, and gangraping a 22-year-old photojournalist at the same place on August 22, 2013. They were 28, 21, and 19 years old respectively at the time of the incident. On March 21, 2014, the sessions court awarded life sentence to all the accused. The fourth convict, Siraj Khan, was sentenced to life imprisonment, and a minor accused was sent to a correctional facility.
The public prosecutor then moved an application to frame charges under Section 376E, which was allowed on March 24 same year. The convicts pleaded not guilty under the section and moved the High Court to challenge it and quash the order of the lower court. On April 4, 2014 , the trial concluded and the trio was awarded death sentence. It was the first such conviction under under Section 376E.
The provision was introduced by the Criminal Law (Amendment) Act, 2013, on February 3, 2013, on the basis of recommendations of the Justice J.S. Verma Committee, which was formed to consider changes in law to deal more sternly with offenders in sexual offence cases following the outrage over the brutal gangrape of a 23-year-old paramedical student in Delhi in 2012.
The trio, in April 2014, approached the High Court challenging the validity of Section 376E and contended that the sessions court acted beyond its power in awarding them the death penalty. The court said, “Convicts lose their liberty under Article 21 (Right to Life) of the Indian Constitution to a certain extent and one who has committed a heinous offence of rape or has repeated it, cannot be allowed to put his life before the lifelong plight of the survivor.”
‘No merit in challenge’
In its 117-page judgment, the court held, “There is no vagueness and confusion inasmuch as there exists a procedure which is just, reasonable and fair to deal with the implementation of Section 376E.” The Bench recorded, “The Parliament, while making its desire clear also did not encroach on the court’s power and discretion, and left the field of punishment open for the Court, to choose a ‘just’ punishment. It has, therefore, kept the choice in the area, between life imprisonment for rest of one’s natural life or death, open for the Court to select and to formulate the most deserving punishment, in the facts of the case. It has, therefore, not made death mandatory under Section 376E and has left the scope for its application on various factors, having a bearing on ‘death penalty’.”
The court said it did not find any merit in the challenge to the constitutional validity of Section 376E, and dismissed the petitions. The Bench said, “We are of the opinion that Section 376E of the IPC is not ultra vires to the Constitution and hence need not be quashed in the present case.” With the dismissal of the petitions, another Bench of the High Court will now take up for final hearing appeals filed by the convicts challenging their conviction and death penalty imposed by the sessions court and also a petition filed by the State government for confirmation of their sentence.
(With PTI inputs)
Timeline
2012
December 16: 23-year-old paramedical student gangraped in Delhi.
2013
February 3: Section 376E introduced by the Criminal Law (Amendment) Act, 2013
July 31: 18-year-old telephone operator gangraped at Shakti Mills
August 22: 22-year-old photojournalist gangraped at Shakti Mills
September 4: Both survivors identify the three accused
September 19: Mumbai Crime Branch files 600-page charge sheet against accused
October 16: Trial begins in sessions court
2014
March 21: Court awards life sentence to convicts
March 24: Court allows application to charge accused under Section 376E
April 4: Court awards death sentence; convicts move HC challenging law
2018
November 21: State not prepared to argue in HC
2019
January 25: HC pulls up State over delay in death penalty confirmation
February 21: HC begins arguments in case
June 3: HC upholds law awarding death penalty to convicts
