Consensual Relationship That Later Turns Sour Is Not Rape: Andhra Pradesh High Court Grants Bail in Breach of Promise Case Double Presumption of Innocence Applies; No Interference Unless Trial Court Judgment Is Perverse: Allahabad High Court in Murder Appeal Under BNSS A Single Act of Corruption Warrants Dismissal – 32 Years of Service Offers No Immunity: Punjab & Haryana High Court Upholds ASI’s Removal Suit Against Trustee Without Charity Commissioner’s Consent Is Statutorily Barred: Bombay High Court Government Can't Deny Implied Surrender After Refusing to Accept Possession: Madras HC Clarifies Scope of Section 111(f) of TP Act Custodial Interrogation Must Prevail Over Pre-Arrest Comfort in Hate Speech Cases: Punjab & Haryana High Court Denies Anticipatory Bail for Provocative Remarks Against Migrants Mutation Order Without Notice Cannot Stand in Law: Orissa High Court Quashes Tahasildar's Rejection for Violating Natural Justice Cruelty Must Be Grave and Proven – Mere Allegations of Disobedience or Demand for Separate Residence Don’t Justify Divorce: Jharkhand High Court Rejects Husband’s Divorce Appeal Retaliatory Prosecution Cannot Override Liberty: Himachal Pradesh High Court Grants Bail in PMLA Case Post CBI Trap of ED Officer Illegal Remand Without Production of Accused Is Not a Technical Lapse, But a Constitutional Breach: Andhra Pradesh High Court Grants Bail in Major NDPS Case Inherent Power Under Section 528 BNSS Not a Substitute for Article 226 When FIR Is Under Challenge Without Chargesheet or Cognizance Order: Allahabad High Court Possession Without Title Is Legally Insubstantial: Gujarat HC Dismisses Appeal By Dairy Cooperative Over Void Land Transfer You Can Prosecute a Former Director, But You Can’t Force Him to Represent the Company: Calcutta High Court Lays Down Clear Limits on Corporate Representation in PMLA Cases Conviction Cannot Rest on Tainted Testimony of Injured Witnesses in Isolation: Bombay High Court Acquits Five in Murder Case One Attesting Witness is Sufficient if He Proves Execution and Attestation of Will as Required by Law: AP High Court Land Acquisition | Delay Cannot Defeat Just Compensation: P&H High Court Grants Enhanced Compensation Despite 12-Year Delay in Review Petitions by Landowners Allegations Implausible, Motivated by Malice: Kerala High Court Quashes Rape Case After Finding Abuse Claims a Counterblast to Civil Dispute Adoptions Under Hindu Law Need No Approval from District Magistrate: Madras High Court Declares Administrative Rejection of Adoptive Birth Certificate as Illegal Findings of Fact Cannot Be Re-Appreciated in an Appeal Under Section 10F Companies Act: Madras High Court Equality Is Not A Mechanical Formula, But A Human Commitment: P&H High Court Grants Visually Impaired Mali Retrospective Promotions With Full Benefits Orissa High Court Rules Notice for No Confidence Motion Must Include Both Requisition and Resolution – Provision Held Mandatory Ashramam Built on Private Land, Managed by Family – Not a Public Religious Institution: Andhra Pradesh High Court Quashes Endowments Notification Cruelty Must Be Proved, Not Presumed: Gujarat High Court Acquits Deceased Husband In 498A Case After 22 Years Trade Dress Protection Goes Beyond Labels: Calcutta High Court Affirms Injunction Over Coconut Oil Packaging Mimicry Mere Filing of Income Tax Returns Does Not Exonerate the Accused: Madras High Court Refuses Discharge to Wife of Public Servant in ₹2 Crore DA Case

Rajasthan High Court Commuted Death Sentence to Life Imprisonment in Gruesome Rape and Murder Case

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant and thought-provoking verdict, the Rajasthan High Court has commuted a death sentence to life imprisonment in a case involving the horrifying rape and murder of a minor girl. The court's decision, delivered by Justices Bhuvan Goyal and Pankaj Bhandari, underscores the delicate equilibrium that must be maintained between the seriousness of the crime and the individual characteristics of the accused.

The judgment, rooted in meticulous legal analysis and referencing past legal precedents, highlights the constitutional aspect of the death penalty. "Life imprisonment is the norm, and the death sentence is the exception," the court iterated, underlining the principle that capital punishment should be reserved for the "rarest of rare cases." The judges emphasized that proportionality is crucial and that the choice between death penalty and life imprisonment must be made by striking a balance between the crime and the offender.

The case in question led to the conviction of the accused on multiple charges including rape, murder, and violation of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act. The court took into account several incriminating factors, including eyewitness accounts, recovered evidence, confessions, and DNA analysis. However, the bench also gave due consideration to mitigating aspects such as the age of the accused, his lack of prior criminal records, absence of premeditation, and behavior during custody.

The court drew parallels with previous judgments where death sentences were commuted to life imprisonment based on similar factors. "Taking into account the aggravating and mitigating circumstances, this case does not meet the criteria of a 'rarest of rare cases'," observed the court, resulting in the decision to convert the death penalty to life imprisonment.

While upholding the conviction on various charges, the court's ruling emphasizes the significance of adhering to established principles laid down in previous cases. The judgment reaffirms the court's commitment to maintaining a nuanced balance between the gravity of the crime and the individual context of the accused.

Date of Decision: 18.07.2023

State Of Rajasthan vs Suresh Kumar

Latest Legal News