Upholding a man’s conviction for subjecting a minor girl to oral sex, the Bombay High Court recently reduced his life sentence to twelve years after noting several factors relating to his conduct while in custody and his background prior to the offence. The division bench comprising Justice Sarang Kotwal and Justice Sandesh Patil reduced the life sentence imposed on one Kalamuddin Mohammad Isteyar Ansari alias Koail, who had been convicted by a special court under Section 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act in December 2020. While doing so, the bench took into account that the appellant had appeared in various examinations and programmes during his time in prison. Among these, he had passed an examination on the “analysis of books” certified by Tilak Maharashtra Vidyapeeth in Pune, obtained certificates from Ramchandra Pratishthan in Mumbai for participation in an essay competition, and had also successfully passed an examination on the thoughts of Mahatma Gandhi certified by the Mumbai Sarvodaya Mandal. The judges observed that these factors taken together, including the fact that the appellant had been continuously in custody since his arrest and had no prior criminal antecedents, warranted some leniency with respect to the sentence. It was also noted that he had not been released on bail even during the Covid-19 pandemic when many prisoners were considered for emergency parole.
The bench further observed that the appellant was only twenty years of age at the time of committing the offence, a fact reflected in the First Information Report (FIR). They also considered that he had remained in custody for more than nine years, including time spent during the trial proceedings, and that this period of detention should be set off under Section 428 of the Criminal Procedure Code. Despite these mitigating factors, the court did not alter the conviction itself and confirmed that the prosecution had proved its case beyond a reasonable doubt. The incident dated back to December 9, 2016, when the appellant had forced the young girl into oral sex at his house while she was there to fetch water from their common tap. After the victim fled to her home frightened, she narrated the ordeal to her mother, who confronted the appellant and subsequently lodged the FIR. The appellant had fled the scene thereafter. In the High Court proceedings, the judges rejected the appellant’s argument that the victim may have been coached by her parents to testify against him, stating that it was highly unlikely that a small girl of five years would concoct such a story with an intent to settle scores. The statements of the victim and her mother were found to be natural and credible, supporting the prosecution’s case on the offences under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 6 of the POCSO Act.
Taking into account the gravity of the offence and the factors favouring leniency, the Bench concluded that a sentence of twelve years’ imprisonment, which is more than the minimum statutory sentence of ten years, would meet the ends of justice. The court therefore modified the sentence to twelve years, concluding that this term would appropriately balance the nature of the offence with the mitigating circumstances of the appellant’s conduct and personal history. This reduction took into account both the time already served and the circumstances identified by the judges, ensuring that the punishment imposed was adjusted without disturbing the conviction itself.
0 Comments
Thank you for your response. It will help us to improve in the future.