Why Sentence Review Board Not Informed About Trial Court Modifying Man's Conviction From Gang Rape To Rape?: Delhi HC Asks Prison Authorities

The Delhi High Court has asked the prison authorities as to why it did not provide complete details of a man to the Sentence Review Board whose conviction was modified by the Trial Court from gang rape to the offence of rape while putting his case before the Board.

Justice Mukta Gupta directed the Director General of Prisons to file an affidavit indicating why such a crucial detail was not put before the Sentence Review Board.

"An affidavit will be filed by the Directorate General (Prisons) indicating as to why the complete facts that the conviction of the petitioner has been altered to one under Section 376 IPC only, were not brought to the notice of SRB and why it is informed to the SRB that the case of the petitioner is one under Sections 376(2)(g)/324/392/397/506/34 IPC & 27 of the Arms Act, as is evident from the Minutes of the SRB dated 11th December 2020," the Court said.

The petitioner was initially convicted for the offence of gang rape provided under sec. 376(2)(g) of IPC, however, his conviction was converted to rape as provided under sec. 376 of IPC vide judgment dated 5th February 2010. While doing so, the Trial Court however did not modify the sentence which was maintained as life imprisonment.

It was therefore the case of the petitioner that his case was rejected by the Board due to the reason that correct facts that his conviction was been modified from the offence of gang rape to that of rape, was not brought to the Board's notice.

To support his case, it was submitted by the petitioner that his conduct inside jail has been exemplary and that he had been working as a Langar Sahayak. Furthermore it was submitted that he was awarded appreciation certificates and paroles/furloughs number of times which concession he did not misuse.

Moreover, it was also submitted that during the period of his incarceration, his father and sister passed away in the year 2015 and 2019 respectively and now his family comprises of his mother only.

"In view of the fact that complete and correct facts were not brought to the notice of the SRB, Director General (Prisons) is directed to ensure that while putting up the case of the petitioner before the SRB in its next meeting, the judgment of conviction passed by the learned Trial Court as also the judgment of this Court in appeal, whereby, the petitioner has been convicted only for the offence punishable under Section 376 IPC and the gist thereof will be placed before the Committee," the Court added.

The Court also directed that status report indicating the outcome of the Sentence Review Board be filed before October 22, the next date of hearing.

Title: RAHUL v. STATE

Click Here To Read Order