Rajasthan High Court commutes death penalty of man wrongly charged for rape, murder of 7-year-old; orders fresh probe

The Jaipur Bench of the Rajasthan High Court, on finding that a death row prisoner was wrongly convicted, directed the Jhalawar Superintendent of Police to reopen investigation into a case arising from the rape and murder of a 7-year-old [State Of Rajasthan v Komal Lodha]..A Bench of Justices Pankaj Bhandari and Anoop Kumar Dhand commuted the death penalty of the convict to life sentence since only the aspect of sentence was before the High Court, with the Supreme Court having already confirmed the conviction. Nevertheless, it proceeded to direct probe into two other persons whose DNA was obtained from the clothes of deceased child. .In a nutshell- The accused was convicted of raping and murdering a 7-year-old and sentenced to death by trial court. The High Court confirmed the conviction but commuted the death to life imprisonment;- The State appealed to the Supreme Court which confirmed the conviction. The matter was, however, remitted to the High Court to reconsider the question of sentence;- In this second round, the High Court found that the entire case rested on circumstantial evidence;- It was noted that the DNA samples indicated false implication and that the two criminals who seemed to have actually committed the offence were not booked;- Thus, the case was directed to be re-opened, and the DLSA was asked to appeal against the conviction;- The High Court also commuted the death penalty of the convict to life imprisonment. .To Elaborate .In a detailed judgment, the Court pointed out various instances during the investigation that indicated the false implication of the accused.However, having been directed by the Supreme Court to confine its decision to the question of sentence, the Bench could not reverse the conviction.“We with heavy heart and with hope that justice would be done to the accused, who has been sentenced to imprisonment till death for crime committed by two other persons, commute sentence from death penalty to life imprisonment.”.The High Court began by examining precedents related to death penalty at length, and discussed reasons that could be considered for converting death penalty to life imprisonment. It held that the Court should consider the cumulative effects of both aggravating and mitigating circumstances in order to strike a balance between the two..The bench noted that the entire case was based on circumstantial evidence. It was taken into account that reliance had been placed by the court on the DNA report as per which, the DNA profiles of two males was obtained from the leggings of the victim. The same profiles were also obtained from the underwear of the accused. However, it did not match that of the accused’s blood sample. “The two male DNA profile obtained from the leggings of the deceased did not match with the DNA profile of the blood sample taken from the accused, the only conclusion that can be drawn from the above is that the two criminals who actually committed the crime were not booked by the police,” the Bench observed..The High Court also took into account that the accused was not given an opportunity to explain his DNA report.Additionally, it was considered that as per the school record of the accused he was a minor at the time of the offence, he did not have any criminal background and had shown good conduct in jail.“The State has not come up with any material to show that the accused is a threat to the society or that he cannot be reformed.”.In this light, the cardinal rule of criminal law that a hundred guilty may be acquitted, but one innocent should not be held guilty was highlighted by the Bench.It was stated that this rule was followed to ensure that overzealous prosecution did not result in the conviction of an innocent man.“The reason for this is to ensure that the police and prosecution do their job right, and to ensure that an overzealous prosecution does not result in an innocent man being convicted of a crime, he did not commit, otherwise people would not have faith and respect for the justice delivery system,” the Court said. .The High Court was of the opinion that the two who had committed the crime shifted blame to the accused with the help of the police.In fact, it was underscored that material facts regarding the age of the accused and the DNA evidence were not brought to the apex court’s attention, and no assistance was provided to the appellant before the top court..Therefore, the Secretary of the Rajasthan State Legal Services Authority was directed to appeal against the previous judgment of the High Court converting the accused’s death sentence to life imprisonment.Further, the Bench in the instant case directed the Jhalawar Superintendent of Police to reopen the matter and investigate afresh the two accused whose DNA samples were obtained from the leggings of the victim.The High Court ordered that appropriate action should be initiated against those who booked the accused belonging to a backward class, and had no means to defend his case.“Superintendent of Police, Jhalawar, should submit report of the action taken by him within two months of the date of this order”..However, owing to its limited jurisdiction, the Court only commuted the death penalty awarded to the accused, to life imprisonment..Advocate Nitin Jain appeared for the accused pro bono (without payment). The State was represented by Additional Government Advocate Rekha Madnani..[Read Judgment]