Madhya Pradesh High Court Commutes Death Sentence Awarded To A Man Who Raped & Murdered An 80-Year-Old Woman

On Wednesday, the Madhya Pradesh High Court commuted the death sentence of a 25-year-old man accused of rape and murder of an 80-year-old woman, considering his age, no criminal record and the fact that the act of sexual assault was done in spontaneity and the same was not the outcome of any premeditation.

"In the facts and circumstances of this case, we deem it proper to follow the same course and while affirming the conviction, deem it proper to commute the sentence, considering the gravity and seriousness of offence to the sentence of imprisonment for the remainder of appellant’s natural life," the bench of Justice Sujoy Paul and Justice Amar Nath (Kesharwani)  said.

In this regard, the bench took into account the Supreme Court's Judgment in the case of Mohd Firoz vs State of Madhya Pradesh 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 390, wherein the Top Court, last year, commuted the death sentence awarded to a man accused of rape and murder of a 4-year-old girl by observing that the maximum punishment prescribed may not always be the determinative factor for repairing the crippled psyche of the offender.

The case in brief

The complainant (Badibai) was working as domestic help for the Victim (an 80-year-old woman) and used to live with her in her house. On February 22, 2017, at around 5:00 AM, when she woke up, she found that the door of the victim's room was locked from the outside. When her son Arif (12 years) managed to open the door, it was found that the entire room was badly disturbed and the victim was lying and there were several injuries on her body. Blood was oozing from the private part of Begum.

The complainant could notice that somebody had entered Victim's room and sexually assaulted her and the victim was too frightened to say anything. Thereafter, she was taken to the hospital for treatment. During the course of the investigation, the victim was medically examined in the Hospital and her dying declaration was recorded by Executive Magistrate. Also, her case diary statement was recorded before she died during the treatment.

From the scene of the crime, the victim’s salwar, bedsheet and ‘Kathri’ were seized. In addition, sunglasses (later found to have been used by the accused) and buttons (later found to be a part of the shirt of the accused) were seized.

Thereafter, the appellant-accused was arrested through Arrest Memo and his shirt was also recovered. The appellant was subjected to a medical examination and the report was prepared. The appellant’s samples were collected and sent for FSL and after the completion of the investigation, a challan was filed.

After the committal, the matter came up for trial before Sessions Court. The appellant abjured the guilt and accordingly full-fledged trial was conducted and the accused was found guilty of rape and murder and was sentenced to death.

Challenging his conviction, the appellant moved to the High Court. 

Since there were no eyewitnesses, therefore, the case of the prosecution was based on five main circumstances namely -

(i) the identification of the dead body of the victim,

(ii) the material collected from the scene of the crime (including the sunglasses and the shirt button),

(iii) dying declarations of the victim,

(iv) memorandum of appellant and seizure on the basis of such memorandum and

(v) DNA report.

High Court's observations

At the outset, the Court noted that the statement of the victim recorded under Section 161 of CrPC could be treated as her first dying declaration whereas her second dying declaration was recorded by the Executive Magistrate and a comparative reading of both statements showed that they were in tune with each other.

"The victim stated that she was sleeping on the date of the incident and a young person entered her room, physically assaulted her, and when the victim tried to protect herself, he further abused and assaulted her. She was sexually assaulted/raped because of which she became unconscious and gained consciousness in the hospital. A conjoint reading of Dehati Nalishi and both the dying declarations leave no room for any doubt that incident of assault and rape with the victim had indeed taken place at her residence because of which she sustained several injuries," the Court noted.

Perusing the post-mortem report, the Court found that the death was homicidal in nature and this fact was accepted by both the parties.

Now, the only question which remained before the Court was - whether the appellant was the person who assaulted the victim and committed sexual assault with her. To examine this question, the Court examined the circumstances on the strength of which the appellant was held guilty by the trial court.

In this regard, the Court, at the outset, noted that the blue shirt button which was recovered from the scene of the crime was an important material on the strength of which the case of the prosecution is founded as the said button was part of the shirt which was recovered from the appellant in the police station. However, the court did not give any value to this piece of evidence.

Further, the Court noted that sunglasses were also recovered from the scene of the crime and when the said sunglasses were shown to Nafis Khan (PW-2), he identified the same and stated that it was recovered from the scene of the crime.

In fact, the Court noted, in his case diary statement he, in clear terms stated that the sunglasses recovered from the victim's house was owned by one Haider Khan who had handed over the same to the appellant a day before the incident.

"Haider Khan (PW-8) also entered the witness box and stated that said goggles was handed over to appellant by him a day before the date of incident. The cross-examination could not demolish the statement of appellant No.2 and Haider Khan (PW-8). Thus, the prosecution could clearly establish that the golden goggle was given to the appellant by Haider and appellant left the same at the scene of crime which was duly identified by Nafis Khan. Thus, this circumstance can be used against the appellant," the Court held.

Further, the Court noted that the prosecution could also establish that the blood sample of the appellant was collected, sealed and sent for a DNA test and a DNA report of the laboratory came against him which also indicated his guilt.

In view of this, the Court affirmed the conviction of the appellant for committing offence under Sections 302, 376(1) and 540 of IPC. However, taking into account the following mitigating circumstances, the death penalty was commuted:

(i) it is not shown that the appellant has any criminal record,

(ii) the rape was the outcome of personal lust, (iii) the sexual assault which resulted in death was not shown to be the outcome of any premeditation and it was done by the accused in spontaneity.

(iv) the crime was not committed to terrorize or harm a particular or larger section of society.

(v) No weapons were used.

(vi) the accused is a young person aged about 25 years.

Case title - RIBU @ AKBAR KHAN vs. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH along with a connected criminal reference

Case Citation:  2023 LiveLaw (MP) 62

Click Here To Read/Download Order