In a significant ruling, the Madras High Court has commuted the death sentence of a man convicted of sexually assaulting his minor daughter to life imprisonment. The court also acquitted the girl’s mother, who was previously sentenced to life imprisonment for abetment, and ordered her immediate release.
A division bench of Justices SS Sundar and Sunder Mohan, while delivering the verdict, emphasized that the death penalty should be reserved for the “rarest of rare” cases. The bench stated,
“The sentence of death can be imposed only in the rarest of rare cases. In other words, it can be imposed only in exceptional cases. Therefore, imposition of the sentence of life imprisonment is the rule,”
citing Supreme Court orders.
The court, after examining the evidence and considering the father’s conduct post-crime, concluded that this case did not fall into the ‘rarest of rare’ category. The bench noted,
“There is nothing on record to show that the accused is a menace to society and there is no possibility of reformation at all and he had behaved properly after the complaint was lodged.”
Consequently, the court modified the death penalty to life imprisonment with a fine of Rs 25,000 under section 6 of the POCSO Act.
Also read- Himachal Pradesh High Court Upholds Doctor’s Right In NEET Counselling Case (lawchakra.in)
The prosecution’s case revealed that the father had sexually abused his daughter from the age of seven and committed penetrative sexual assault after she reached puberty at 12. He also resorted to cruel methods to abort the fetus once the girl became pregnant. The abuse came to light when the girl confided in her classmate and teacher, leading to a police complaint by the child welfare committee.
The court also addressed the controversial ‘two-finger test’ conducted on the victim, strongly reprimanding the doctors involved. The bench stated,
“However, we notice regrettably that two finger test had been conducted in the instant case, though the Hon’ble Supreme Court and this Court in several cases have repeatedly held that such a test is neither acceptable nor desirable to ascertain whether the victim was subjected to sexual intercourse.”
The court warned that doctors conducting such tests in contravention of Supreme Court directives would be guilty of misconduct.
This ruling not only alters the sentences of the individuals involved but also reinforces the judiciary’s stance on the application of the death penalty and the use of outdated and invasive medical procedures in sexual assault cases.
