Updated 26 December 2025 at 17:13 IST
The Punjab and Haryana High Court sentenced a man to 30 years in prison for raping and killing a five-year-old girl, while sharply criticising India’s ‘Raja Beta’ culture and blind parental protection rooted in patriarchy.
Chandigarh: The Punjab and Haryana High Court has changed the death sentence of a man sentenced for the rape and murder of a five-year-old girl in 2018 to 30 years of rigorous imprisonment, while making pertinent observations on what it described as the deeply rooted “Raja Beta” mindset in parts of Indian society. The appeal was being heard by a division bench consisting of Justices Anoop Chitkara and Sukhvinder Kaur. The appeal was submitted by a mother-son pair who had been found guilty of the violent crime. The court upheld the accused's conviction but reduced the death penalty to a fixed 30-year prison sentence and levied a fine of ₹30 lakh to compensate the child's relatives.
 |
| Punjab and Haryana High Court - File photo |
Court’s Sharp Observations on Social Mindset
The High Court noted in its ruling that boys are frequently seen as "precious Raja Betas" in many families, especially in northern India, regardless of how defective or even illegal their behavior may be. Such blind parental support, particularly by women, is "deeply embedded in the region's patriarchal mindset and culture," the court observed. The bench noted that even after learning of her son's heinous conduct, the mother decided to protect him instead of calling the police or pursuing justice for the victim. Although not criminally culpable in this instance, the court characterized this inclination as socially unacceptable.
The Crime: What Happened in 2018
The incident occurred on May 31, 2018. The accused had been employed by the victim's father, a small-time tent installer, for almost five or six years. The prosecution claims that after bringing the five-year-old child to his home, the accused sexually assaulted her then fatally stabbed her with a kitchen knife. He then hid her body inside a large kitchen container used by his mother for storage, after emptying it. The accused's mother was away at work at the time of the crime. The child's family was later informed by the villagers that they had seen the youngster accompanying the accused as he led her to his residence. The accused was observed strolling with the youngster while holding her hand, according to CCTV footage from a local school. When the accused's mother was questioned by the family and locals at his home, she refused to let them in and denied that her son or the child was there. A container was found in the compound by the victim's relative. The child's body was discovered inside when it was opened.
Charges and Trial Court Verdict
The accused was booked under multiple sections of the Indian Penal Code, which include Sections 302 (murder), 376 (rape), 120-B (criminal conspiracy), 366 and 363 (kidnapping), and 201 (causing missing of evidence), along with Section 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, 2012. In addition, his mother was accused of aiding in the crime's concealment under IPC Sections 120-B, 366, 363, and 201. The trial court found both guilty on January 24, 2020. His mother received a sentence of seven years of hard labor, while the accused was given the death penalty. Later, both appealed the decision to the High Court.
High Court Decision on the Mother’s Role
The mother was finally cleared of all charges, despite the High Court's harsh criticism of her behavior. According to the bench, she acted out of "orthodox conditioning" and an innate desire to keep her son safe. Although her actions were ethically and socially repugnant, the court determined that they did not constitute criminal conspiracy or active involvement in the crime. The bench stated, "Her only fault was trying to protect her Raja Beta," noting that although such behavior was wrong, it could not result in criminal punishment in this particular instance.
Why Death Penalty Was Reduced
Calling the crime gruesome, the court noted that the child had “absolute trust” in the accused and could not have imagined the “evil of a devil.” In order to protect other women and children, the judges emphasized that the convict posed a major threat to society and needed to stay behind bars. Nonetheless, the bench noted that the murder was not planned and was carried out in a haste to obliterate any proof of rape. Based on this, the court decided that it would not be acceptable to take the convict's life through judicial execution. Rather, it chose a "humane mix" of punishment, reducing the death penalty to 30 years in jail without the possibility of early release. According to the court, incapacitating the offender for an extended period of time will better serve the interests of justice and public safety.
Principles of Sentencing Explained
Additionally, the High Court established more general guidelines for punishment, stating that a sentence must be steady and balanced, akin to a table with equally strong legs. The bench states that when determining a sentence, judges must take into account four important factors; the crime; the victim; the criminal and his family; and society and the state. The accused's conviction was affirmed by the High Court, which also lowered his death sentence to 30 years in jail, fined the victim's family ₹30 lakh, and cleared his mother of all charges. However, the court strongly condemned the mindset and acts that led to the crime.
Source: https://www.republicworld.com/india/blind-love-for-raja-betas-hc-tears-into-patriarchy-while-jailing-child-rape-murder-convict-for-30-years
