Court sentences man to life imprisonment in murder case, saying offence does not qualify as the rarest of rare cases

A court here has sentenced a man to life imprisonment in a murder case while ruling out the death penalty, saying that the offence did not fall into the category of rarest of rare cases

Court sentences man to life imprisonment, saying offence does not qualify as the rarest of rare cases

Photo: Unsplash

On 26 July, the court convicted the accused holding that it was a case of culpable homicide, with such knowledge that the injury being inflicted could have caused death in normal circumstances.

As per the prosecution, the accused assaulted the victim with an iron rod on 12 January 2003, and the victim succumbed to head injuries after four days.

The convict Vipul Kumar is sentenced to undergo life imprisonment for committing an offence punishable under Section 302(murder) of the Indian Penal Code, Additional Sessions Judge Pulastya Pramachala stated in an order dated 5 September.

The judge further ordered the accused to pay a fine of Rs 4 lakh, out of which Rs 3.75 lakh was payable to the deceased legitimate heirs.

According to the court, death sentence could not be awarded as the present case did not qualify in the category of rarest of rare cases.

Following review of the evidence, the judge found that the incident, wherein convict Vipul Kumar committed the murder of deceased Sushil, does not have such nature, so as to shake the conscience of a reasonable person.

Undoubtedly, the judge added, it was an unfortunate incident, but it is to be borne in mind that death was caused by inflicting a single iron rod on the head of the deceased, and therefore, it can not be said that this murder was committed in a gruesome manner.

The court observed that once a life has been taken away, the killer remains under debt of the family of the deceased and as a measure and gesture of repentance, such person must be willing to at least provide compensation to legal heirs of the deceased.

The court further stated that passing separate sentence against the accused for conviction under Section 323 (punishment for voluntarily causing hurt) of the IPC was not needed, as the four co-convicts for this offence have been admonished by this court.

The court released four other accused in the case after due admonition, saying that the case was related to a quarrel between two families and both parties while defending themselves in court would have learnt sufficient lessons.

Facing trial before the court is a lesson and therefore, the same also weighs in the consideration for sentencing, the court said. It added, the incident, in this case, should not be allowed to have its effect anymore, and it is better for both the parties to move forward with a positive mind.

To facilitate the same and keeping in view the minor nature of the offence under Section 323 of the IPC, I deem it fit to release convicts Kumar Pal, Sanjay, Prakashwati and Dharamwati, thereby admonishing them in the present case, the judge stated.

(With inputs from PTI)

 

For more stories that cover the ongoings of Delhi NCR, follow us on:
Instagram: instagram.com/thepatriot_in/
Twitter: twitter.com/Patriot_Delhi
Facebook: facebook.com/Thepatriotnewsindia

+ posts