The Rohini District Court in Delhi sentenced a now-adult individual, who was a minor at the time of the crime, to life imprisonment for the rape and murder of a 5-year-old girl, a case initially reported in 2017. The court observed that the convicted individual was over 16 years old at the time of the offense. Special Judge (POCSO) Sushil Bala Dagar also imposed a fine and directed compensation to the victim’s family.
New Delhi: In a case involving the rape and death of a 5-year-old girl, the Rohini District Court in Delhi tried a minor as an adult and sentenced him to life imprisonment.
The court noted that the now-convicted individual over the age of 16 years at the time of the crime, which first reported in 2017.
Special Judge (POCSO) Sushil Bala Dagar imposed a fine of Rs 10,000 for the offence of murder. Additionally, the court directed the District Legal Services Authority to pay Rs 17 lakh as compensation to the family of the minor victim.
The court observed,
“At present, CCL ‘S’ is approximately 25 years old. He previously worked in a flour mill and later took up shuttering work at construction sites. He is also skilled in cooking, having worked in a restaurant where he prepared Rajma-Chawal. This indicates that CCL is capable of working during his imprisonment.”
During the hearing, the Special Public Prosecutor (SPP) for the Delhi Police sought the maximum punishment of life imprisonment, emphasizing the gravity of the crime and the psychology of the accused. The SPP argued that redemption was not possible and thus the accused should receive the maximum punishment.
The SPP emphasized that while there are many privileges under the Juvenile Justice Act 2015, these should not undermine the severity of the offence or the punishment.
He stated,
“In the present case, the circumstances in which CCL committed rape and murder of just a five-year-old girl do not entitle him to any kind of benefit, as the law cannot enjoin the court to do injustice to anyone and to give undue favour to the other.”
The court also noted that the convict, now approximately 25 years old, had previous work experience in a flour mill and construction sites, and also skilled in cooking, having worked in a restaurant. This background demonstrated his capability to work during his sentence.
Read Also: New Criminal Laws Criticized for “Marital Rape” Exemption Clause
The judgment highlights the court’s stance on ensuring justice for heinous crimes, regardless of the offender’s age, when the crime’s severity demands stringent punishment.
This case sets a significant precedent in the legal treatment of juveniles involved in severe crimes, highlighting the judiciary’s commitment to delivering justice irrespective of the offender’s age. The judgment underscores the principle that the severity of the punishment must correspond to the gravity of the offence, ensuring that such heinous acts are met with appropriate legal repercussions.