The Supreme Court of India, in a bench led by CJI BR Gavai and Justice K Vinod Chandran, temporarily suspends the life imprisonment of Father Edwin Pigarez, convicted of raping a minor, noting he has already served nearly half of his sentence. Bail is granted pending appeals.
New Delhi: The Supreme Court of India temporarily suspended the life imprisonment sentence of Father Edwin Pigarez, a Roman Catholic priest who was convicted of raping a minor girl. The top court granted him bail while his appeals against the Kerala High Court’s conviction are still pending.
The bench hearing the case consisted of Chief Justice BR Gavai and Justice K Vinod Chandran. The decision comes after careful consideration of the facts, including the duration Father Pigarez has already spent in prison.
The Supreme Court, while deciding on Father Edwin Pigarez’s bail, referred to sections 376(2)(i) and 376(2)(n) of the Indian Penal Code, which deal with aggravated sexual assault on minors.
Section 376(2)(i) IPC
This clause specifically deals with rape of a minor girl below the age of sixteen years. It classifies such acts as aggravated forms of rape because the victim is a child and therefore far more vulnerable.
The law recognizes that minors cannot give valid consent, and any sexual act with them amounts to rape regardless of circumstances.
- Punishment: The section provides for rigorous imprisonment of not less than ten years, which may extend to life imprisonment.
- Meaning of life imprisonment here: Life means imprisonment for the rest of the convict’s natural life.
- No remission: Courts generally impose stricter sentences, considering the gravity of the crime.
Section 376(2)(n) IPC
This clause addresses repeated rape on the same woman. If a man commits rape on a woman more than once, it falls under this aggravated category, which is considered more serious than a single act.
- Punishment: Rigorous imprisonment of not less than ten years, which may extend to life imprisonment.
- Objective: This provision ensures that habitual offenders or those who repeatedly assault the same victim face harsher consequences.
The bench noted that although life imprisonment is a possible punishment for such offenses, the law also prescribes a minimum sentence of ten years, ensuring that the punishment is not less than what is legally mandated.
While suspending Pigarez’s sentence, the Court emphasized that he has already served nearly ten years in prison, which is the minimum term required under the law.
The bench further highlighted that even if it were to fully accept the twenty-year sentence imposed by the Kerala High Court, Pigarez has already completed half of that term, demonstrating that a substantial portion of the punishment has been served.
The Court considered these factors while evaluating the bail request, observing that granting temporary release would not undermine the seriousness of the offense but would be in line with procedural fairness, given the appeals are still pending.
The Supreme Court’s approach reflects a balance between upholding legal provisions for minimum sentencing and ensuring that procedural rights of the convict, including the right to appeal, are protected.
ALSO READ: Delhi Court Quashes Gag Order Against Journalists in Adani Defamation Case
Chief Justice BR Gavai, one of the judges in the bench, has recently faced criticism for his remarks in a separate case. In that matter, a Hindu petitioner had sought the restoration of a beheaded 7-foot idol of Lord Vishnu at the Javari temple in Khajuraho, Madhya Pradesh.
Commenting on the request, Chief Justice Gavai had said,
“Go and ask the deity itself to do something now… It’s an archaeological site and ASI needs to give permission etc. Sorry.”
These comments drew widespread attention and criticism from various quarters.
The case of Father Pigarez dates back several years. In February 2024, the Kerala High Court had upheld his conviction for repeatedly raping and sexually assaulting a minor girl in his parish. However, while confirming the guilt, the High Court reduced the sentence.
It changed the punishment from life imprisonment to twenty years of rigorous imprisonment without the possibility of remission.
The Supreme Court, while deciding on the bail, referred to sections 376(2)(i) and 376(2)(n) of the Indian Penal Code.
The bench noted that although life imprisonment is an option for such offenses, the law also prescribes a minimum sentence of ten years.
The Court observed that Father Pigarez has already served almost ten years in prison. The bench further highlighted that even if the twenty-year sentence imposed by the High Court were to be fully considered, Pigarez has already completed half of that term.
Considering these factors, the Supreme Court decided to suspend the sentence and allowed Pigarez to be released on bail until his appeals are resolved.
ALSO READ: Delhi High Court on Kejriwal’s Bungalow Plea: “Allotment of Houses Can’t Be on Whims”
The Court ordered that he be released on bail in connection with Sessions Case No. 203 of 2016, subject to the terms and conditions set by the Trial Court.
Case Title:
Fr Edwin Pigarez v. State of Kerala
CRL.A No. 1321 of 2016, CRL.A No. 160 of 2017
Read Order:
Click Here To Read More Reports on Digital Scam
