Case Note & Summary
The Supreme Court of India heard an appeal against the death sentence imposed on Raju Jagdish Paswan for the rape and murder of a 9-year-old girl. The incident occurred on June 21, 2010, when the victim went missing from school. The appellant, who worked at the same poultry farm as the victim's father, was identified by witnesses and led police to the body in a well. Medical evidence confirmed rape and drowning as cause of death. The trial court convicted him under Sections 302, 376(2)(f), and 201 IPC and sentenced him to death, which was confirmed by the High Court. The Supreme Court limited its notice to the sentence. The court analyzed the rarest of rare doctrine from Bachan Singh and Machhi Singh, noting that life imprisonment is the rule and death sentence an exception. It found that while the crime was heinous, the case rested on circumstantial evidence, the appellant was young (22 years), and there was a possibility of reformation. The court held that the aggravating circumstances did not outweigh the mitigating factors, and the death penalty was disproportionate. Consequently, the court commuted the death sentence to life imprisonment for the remainder of the appellant's natural life, while upholding the other sentences.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Death Penalty - Rarest of Rare Doctrine - Section 302 IPC - The court examined whether the death sentence imposed for rape and murder of a 9-year-old girl was proportionate. Held that life imprisonment is the rule and death sentence an exception; the case did not fall within the rarest of rare category due to circumstantial evidence and possibility of reformation (Paras 1-10). B) Criminal Law - Sentencing - Aggravating and Mitigating Circumstances - Sections 302, 376(2)(f), 201 IPC - The trial court and High Court considered aggravating factors such as the heinous nature of the crime and the victim's age, and mitigating factors including the appellant's age (22 years) and the circumstantial nature of evidence. Held that the mitigating circumstances, particularly the possibility of reformation, outweighed aggravating factors (Paras 3-5, 10). C) Criminal Procedure - Reference for Confirmation of Death Sentence - Section 366 CrPC - The trial court made a reference to the High Court for confirmation of death sentence. The High Court affirmed the conviction and sentence after re-appreciation of evidence. Held that the High Court's confirmation was subject to Supreme Court's scrutiny on proportionality (Paras 5-6).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the death penalty imposed on the Appellant is disproportionate to the crime committed by him
Final Decision
The Supreme Court allowed the appeals in part, set aside the death sentence, and sentenced the appellant to life imprisonment for the remainder of his natural life for the offence under Section 302 IPC. The sentences under Sections 376(2)(f) and 201 IPC were upheld.
Law Points
- Death penalty is an exception
- life imprisonment is the rule
- Rarest of rare doctrine
- Aggravating and mitigating circumstances must be balanced
- Possibility of reformation is a relevant factor
- Circumstantial evidence alone may not warrant death penalty
