Supreme Court cites young age, possibility of reformation to reduce gang rape convict's sentence to 20 years

The Supreme Court on Monday reduced the sentence of a man convicted of gang rape from imprisonment for the remainder of his natural life to 20 years' rigorous imprisonment with the benefit of remission [Ehsaan v. State of National Capital Territory of Delhi].

A Bench of Justices Sanjay Karol and Augustine George Masih held that the sentence warranted modification since the convict was only 25 years old when he committed the offence, had no criminal antecedents and had maintained good conduct during nearly 10 years of incarceration.

The Bench also found that there remained a possibility of his reformation, noting that the State had not placed any material on record to show otherwise.

The Court held that sentencing must satisfy the doctrine of proportionality by balancing the gravity of the offence with mitigating circumstances, including the possibility of reformation.

At the same time, the Bench underscored that gang rape is a heinous offence against both the victim and society and incidents of sexual violence continue despite legislative reforms.

"Considering the principles discussed above and applying them to the factors accruing in favour of the appellant-convict noted earlier, we deem it appropriate to modify the sentence to 20 years with benefit of remission, if any. The appeal is partly allowed," the Bench said.

The case arose from an incident in September 2016 when the victim hired a rickshaw from Delhi Railway Station after the convict assured her that he would drop her home. Instead, he took her to a deserted place where a co-accused joined him, and the two raped her.

In June 2017, a Delhi trial court convicted him under Section 376D of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), which deals with the offence of gang rape, and sentenced him to imprisonment for the remainder of his natural life.

The Delhi High Court upheld both the conviction and sentence later that year.

Aggrieved by the High Court's decision, the convict approached the Supreme Court.

The top court, while issuing notice in January this year, declined to examine his conviction and confined the appeal to the question of sentence.

In deciding whether the sentence should be modified, the Bench referred to several earlier Supreme Court decisions in which sentences had been modified in serious offences. It also reiterated that punishment must satisfy the doctrine of proportionality.

The Bench also noted that after the 2012 Nirbhaya gang rape, parliament made changes to criminal law to prescribe a minimum sentence of 20 years for gang rape. It observed that courts cannot reduce the sentence below this statutory minimum.

Thus, the Court partly allowed the appeal and reduced the convicts's sentence from imprisonment for the remainder of his natural life to 20 years' rigorous imprisonment with the benefit of remission.

[Read Judgment]