'Desecrated The Temple Where Children Should Have Had A Safe Time': Delhi Court Sentences Priest To Life Imprisonment For Raping Two Minor Girls, Quotes American Poet Maya Angelou

A Delhi Court recently sentenced a 76 years old priest to life imprisonment for raping two minor girls aged 7 and 9 years. The minor victims were also granted compensation to the tune of Rs 7,50, 000 for the physical and emotional trauma suffered. 

Additional Sessions Judge Vijeta Singh Rawat observed, 

"The convict was a priest by profession and committed offences upon children within the sacred precincts of a temple. He has betrayed the trust and respect the victims and the public had upon him. No remorse was expressed at any stage of the trial. In the facts and circumstances of this case, if leniency is shown, this Court would be letting down the children who have fought all odds to pursue the matter. These victims have been scarred for future. The Court would also be failing in its duty if such predators are set free and allowed to circulate endangering other children"

The judge even quoted  late American poet and activist Maya Angelou from her autobiography "I Know Why the Caged Bird Sing" which states "Then there was the pain. A breaking and entering when even the senses are torn apart. The act of rape on an eight-year-old body is a matter of the needle giving because the camel can't. The child gives, because the body can, and the mind of the violator cannot."

It was opined that the quote succinctly captured the pathos, when the dignity of a defenceless child victim was violated by an adult through his vile actions. 

The Court observed that the Prevention of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, 2012 had been implemented to penalise child sexual abuse in its strongest terms and accordingly referred to the 'Introduction' of the legislation which stipulates, "such offences against children need to be defined explicitly and countered through adequate penalties as an effective deterrence". 

"It has been framed to ensure that perpetrators with such depravity and proclivity, who do not spare the weak, defenceless, trusting and vulnerable children, need to be dealt with sternly because such dark moments of childhood can scar our children for a lifetime", the Court opined further.

Furthermore, the Court rejected the argument that the clean antecedent of the convict would act as a mitigating circumstance by placing reliance on the Supreme Court decision in Purushottam Dashrath Borate & Anr v. State Of Maharashtra wherein it had been held that lack of criminal antecedents would not act as a mitigating circumstance when it comes to heinous offences. Accordingly, the Court observed that 'every act of violating the dignity of a child deserves equal condemnation'.

The argument that the convict hails from a poor socio economic background was also dismissed by the Court by placing reliance on the Supreme Court decision in State of Karnataka v. Raju wherein it was observed that the measure of punishment meted out to a convict cannot depend on his social status instead factors such as the conduct of the convict and the gravity of the offence must be taken into consideration.

Furthermore, the Court opined that there does not seem to be any scope for reformation and accordingly observed,

"It has not been proved that the offences had been committed on account of any mental stress or emotional distress and also considering that extremely vulnerable victims were preyed upon by the convict despite his old age and repeatedly, there seems to be no scope for reformation. Rather, considering that minor children aged about 7 and 9 years had been repeatedly raped by the convict, who was then aged about 69-70 years, irrefragably speaks volumes about the depravity and proclivity in the mindset of the convict which is an aggravating circumstance."

It further added,

"The offences were committed repeatedly on both the victims. This only shows the rapacious and habitual conduct on the part of the convict. As already opined above, such habitual sexual predator cannot be trusted with. He has even not cared for the respect and faith attached to his office as a priest and has also desecrated the temple where the children should have had a carefree and safe time"

Accordingly, the Court sentenced the convict to rigorous imprisonment for life and imposed a fine of Rs.50,000/ for the offence under Section 376 (rape) of the IPC. For the offence under Section 506 IPC (criminal intimidation), the convict was sentenced to five years of rigorous imprisonment along with the imposition of fine amounting to Rs 10, 000. The sentences were directed to run concurrently and the fine was ordered to be paid to the victims as compensation.

Compensation:

The Court opined that the purpose of the criminal justice system is not only to punish offenders but also to adequately rehabilitate victims especially victims who are minors whose 'psychological well-being have been dented and may have repercussions throughout life'.

Accordingly, the Court perused the Victim Impact Assessment Reports wherein it had been recommended that the victims need to be compensated for their emotional trauma. It was also noted that the convict has a monthly income of Rs 6000 and that he has an ancestral property at Dausa, Rajasthan. Reliance was also placed on Part II of the Delhi Victims Compensation Scheme, 2015 that caters to compensation for women victims and survivors of sexual assault.

The Court further noted that the minor victims have been suffering from recurrent abdominal issues as a result of the sexual assault. Accordingly, the Court granted each of the victims a compensation amount to the tune of Rs 7,50, 000 by observing,

"It is apparent from record that the parents of the victims are not monetarily sound enough to cater to the special needs of the victims on account of repeated sexual assault at such tender age. In the considered view of this Court, to give effect to Restorative and Compensatory Justice and to rehabilitate the victims, it would be appropriate to grant compensation of Rs.7,50,000/- to each victim to secure their emotional and mental health and to ensure that they have unhindered education equipping them for a safer future"

Since the convict did not have sufficient means to pay the aforementioned compensation, the District Legal Services Authority (DLSA) was directed to disburse the compensation amount as per its statutory rules. A copy of the order was directed to be sent to the Secretary of the DLSA (South) to secure compliance.

Case Title: State v. Vishva Bandhu

Click Here To Read/Download Order