Supreme Court commutes death penalty of man who murdered wife and 4 children, raped daughter

The Supreme Court on Tuesday commuted the death sentence of one Reji Kumar convicted for raping his minor daughter and murdering his wife and four children [Reji Kumar Alias Reji vs. State of Kerala]..A Bench of Justices Vikram Nath, Sanjay Karol and Sandeep Mehta said that the offence, while brutal, did not justify capital punishment in light of his reformative conduct during incarceration.The Bench opined that considering the convict’s satisfactory jail record, past trauma and mental health concerns, the sentence of death could not be sustained.“Considering the facts that the convict-appellant had no prior antecedents; good conduct for the past 16–17 years of incarceration; difficulties in mental health and consistent efforts at being a model prisoner, we find that the imposition of death penalty would be unjustified. He is, therefore, removed from death row,” the Court held while setting aside the sentence handed down by the trial court and upheld by the Kerala High Court..Reji Kumar was convicted for the rape and murder of his 12-year-old daughter, as well as the murder of his wife and three other children aged 10, 9 and 3 years. The crime took place over the course of several days in July 2008.The trial court acquitted him of the charge under Section 297 IPC (trespassing on burial places) but convicted him on all other counts.The trial court awarded him the death sentence in 2010, citing the brutality of the offence, the premeditated nature of the killings and the betrayal of trust towards the family. The Kerala High Court upheld the conviction and sentence in 2014 after observing that the case met the “rarest of rare” test for imposition of capital punishment.The convict then moved the Supreme Court in appeal.While affirming the conviction under Sections 302 (murder), 376 (rape) and 201 (causing disappearance of evidence) of the IPC, the Supreme Court noted that the appellant had shown significant reform during his incarceration.He had no prior criminal record, exhibited good conduct in jail, and had been entrusted with responsibilities by jail authorities. He had also donated over ₹83,000 to causes including bail amounts of fellow inmates.The Court also took into account psychological reports which revealed that the convict had suffered childhood neglect, family instability and mental health issues. He had developed coping mechanisms and showed signs of repentance.“In view of the facts and circumstances… we are of the view that he does not deserve to be set free and direct that he shall spend the remainder of his days in jail, till his last breath, hoping to do acts of penance to atone for the crimes he has committed and particularly for the fact that he extinguished four bright flames,” the Court said..The appellant was represented by Senior Advocates Sonia Mathur and Shreya Rastogi along with advocates Sakshi Jain, Maulshree Pathak, Ronika Tater, Shubhi Bhardwaj, Nikhil Chandra Jaiswal, Mukund P Unny and Sanjay Nair S.The respondent was represented by Senior Advocate PV Dinesh along with advocates Nishe Rajen Shonker, Anu K Joy, Alim Anvar, Santhosh K, Anna Oommen and Sayed Nazarat Fatima. .[Read Judgment]