Abolish Death Penalty India: Death Penalty Must Balance Aggravating and Mitigating Factors in Rarest of Rare Cases: Chhattisgarh High Court

Wednesday, March 5, 2025

Death Penalty Must Balance Aggravating and Mitigating Factors in Rarest of Rare Cases: Chhattisgarh High Court

By Law Trend

March 5, 2025 9:27 PM

The Chhattisgarh High Court, in a significant ruling, upheld the death sentence of Panchram alias Mannu Gendre (35), convicted for the brutal murder of a four-year-old child. The division bench, comprising Chief Justice Ramesh Sinha and Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal, emphasized that while the death penalty must be reserved for for the “rarest of rare” cases...

Summary

🧑‍⚖️ Case Background

Accused: Panchram alias Mannu Gendre, about 35 years old.
Crime: He was convicted by a trial court for kidnapping and murdering a 4-year-old boy (Harsh Chetan) in Raipur district, Chhattisgarh. The prosecution alleged that he took the child under the pretext of going to visit places, then murdered him by pouring petrol and setting him on fire. The child’s half-burnt body was later found after the accused was traced and arrested. Casemine

⚖️ Trial Court Sentence

The trial court convicted him under Sections 302 (murder), 363 and 364 (kidnapping) of the IPC and sentenced him to death, subject to High Court confirmation. Casemine

📍 High Court Decision (Chhattisgarh High Court – Feb 19, 2025)

Conviction Upheld: The High Court affirmed his guilt for the murder and related offences. Casemine
Death Sentence Commuted: However, the High Court rejected confirmation of the death penalty and commuted it to life imprisonment for the remainder of his natural life. Casemine

🧠 Key Reasoning by the High Court

The bench (Chief Justice Ramesh Sinha and Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal) discussed principles on capital punishment:

Balance of Factors: Courts must balance aggravating factors (such as brutality of the crime) and mitigating factors (such as age, criminal history, and possibility of reformation) before confirming a death sentence. Casemine
Mitigating Circumstances: Although the crime was brutal, the court noted that the accused:
- was about 35 at the time,
- had no previous criminal record, and
- there was no evidence showing he cannot be reformed or rehabilitated. Casemine
“Rarest of Rare” Standard: The High Court held that the case did not meet the “rarest of rare” threshold required under Indian law to justify the death penalty. It found that life imprisonment would sufficiently meet the ends of justice. Casemine

📌 Outcome

Death sentence ❌ → Life imprisonment ✔️, to be served for the rest of his natural life.
Conviction for murder and kidnapping remains intact.

Source: https://www.casemine.com/judgement/in/67ec6debb126b2159568e3a1

No comments:

Post a Comment

The Death Penalty Scenario in India

India is one of 193 countries that retains the death penalty. Some judges have delivered landmark verdicts upholding the rights of death row prisoners, while debates continue advocating abolition or reform of sentencing policies. The Indian government remains committed to retention, asserting executions occur only in “rarest of rare” cases. The death penalty applies to crimes including murder, kidnapping, terrorism, desertion, inducement to suicide of a minor or mentally-retarded person, and in certain cases of rape. Outrage over child rape and murder has intensified these discussions. After an unofficial eight-year moratorium, the government executed Ajmal Kasab (Mumbai attacks) in 2012 and Afzal Guru (Parliament attack) in 2013, both covertly and immediately after mercy petitions were rejected. Prior to this, Dhananjoy Chatterjee was executed in 2004 after 13 years on death row. Following these, many mercy petitions have been rejected, creating fear among death row convicts. Courts continue to hand down death sentences at an increasing rate. Empirical studies highlight the plight of death row prisoners. The India Exclusion Report 2017-18 found fair trial rights largely denied, with convicts often marginalized by caste, religion, poverty, and education. The Death Penalty Research Project (2015) documented socio-economic profiles and experiences of death row prisoners. Dr. Reena Mary George’s studies (2014, 2009) emphasized poverty, social exclusion, and dignity as central to death row experiences, and examined the human rights impact of the penalty. According to the National Crime Records Bureau 2015, 101 prisoners were on death row, with many sentences commuted to life. The “rarest of rare” doctrine introduced by the Supreme Court in the 1980s has not substantially limited death sentences, which have increased over the decades. Justice Joseph (2018) reaffirmed the Bachan Singh judgment but urged restriction of the death penalty to only those cases meeting its criteria. While updating the blog and conducting my own empirical studies, I observed the heinous nature of the crimes that were committed and thought about the families, about their loss, about the victims who for no fault of their own died. If I lost my relative or a dear friend, would I still oppose death penalty and would I still advocate to abolish the death sentence? Having worked in the criminal justice system and also having the seen the other side, where often it is the marginalized, vulnerable and oppressed who are on death row makes me want to advocate for abolition of this punishment. Victims should definitely get justice for their loss, for their pain. No one should escape the rule of law. As long as humanity exists; crime will exist. Should we not re-consider our sentencing policies? Reena Mary George