Supreme Court Commutes Death Sentence in Bihar Child Rape and Murder Case

The Supreme Court of India, in the case of Md. Mannan @ Abdul Mannan vs. State of Bihar, delivered a landmark ruling on the application of the ‘rarest of rare’ doctrine in capital punishment cases. The Court commuted the death sentence of the petitioner, who was convicted for the rape and murder of an eight-year-old girl, to life imprisonment without the possibility of remission. The judgment reiterated that life imprisonment is the rule, and the death penalty is an exception, requiring thorough consideration of mitigating circumstances before being imposed.

Background of the Case

The case dates back to September 28, 2004, when the accused, Md. Mannan, was working as a mason at the residence of the victim’s grandfather. On that day, he allegedly gave money to the victim to buy betel leaves from a nearby market. Shortly after, he was seen riding his bicycle with the child, who never returned home.

When the child went missing, frantic searches ensued, and the police were informed. During the investigation, witnesses stated that the victim was last seen with the accused. The police apprehended Mannan, who allegedly confessed to the crime in the presence of witnesses. Based on his disclosure, the victim’s body was recovered from a field.

Trial Court Proceedings

The case went to trial in the Fast Track Court in Bihar. The key evidence against the accused included:

Eyewitness testimonies stating he was last seen with the victim.
A confessional statement where he admitted to raping and killing the girl.
Post-mortem evidence confirming that the victim died due to asphyxiation from strangulation.
Medical examination indicating the presence of spermatozoa in the victim’s vaginal swab.

On May 29, 2007, the Trial Court convicted the accused under Sections 201, 366A, 376, and 302 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). The Court imposed:

10 years of rigorous imprisonment under Section 366A IPC.
Life imprisonment under Section 376 IPC.
7 years of rigorous imprisonment under Section 201 IPC.
Death sentence under Section 302 IPC.

The Trial Court reasoned that the crime was “barbaric, heinous, and against society at large,” justifying the extreme penalty.

High Court and Supreme Court Appeal

The matter was referred to the Patna High Court for confirmation of the death sentence. The accused also filed a criminal appeal against his conviction. On review, the High Court upheld the conviction and confirmed the death penalty.

The accused then approached the Supreme Court of India, challenging both his conviction and the death sentence.

Supreme Court’s Analysis

The Supreme Court extensively reviewed the legal principles governing the imposition of the death penalty, relying on previous landmark rulings:

Bachan Singh vs. State of Punjab (1980): The Court emphasized that the death sentence should only be awarded in the ‘rarest of rare’ cases.
Machhi Singh vs. State of Punjab (1983): The Court laid down the criteria for determining when a crime falls within the ‘rarest of rare’ category.
Santosh Kumar Satishbhushan Bariyar vs. State of Maharashtra (2009): The Court held that reformation must be a key consideration in sentencing.
Shatrughan Chauhan vs. Union of India (2014): The Court ruled that prolonged solitary confinement and mental health deterioration of a convict should be considered while deciding on clemency.

Applying these principles, the Supreme Court found that:

The Trial Court and High Court had failed to consider mitigating factors before imposing the death penalty.
The accused had no prior criminal record and was a first-time offender.
The accused was in prolonged solitary confinement since 2004, which had impacted his mental health.
No effort was made by the lower courts to determine whether the accused was capable of reformation.
Although the crime was horrific, the prosecution’s case was based entirely on circumstantial evidence.
The accused had received ineffective legal representation at the sentencing stage.

Final Judgment

The Supreme Court set aside the death sentence.
The conviction under Sections 201, 366A, 376, and 302 IPC was upheld.
The Court imposed life imprisonment without the possibility of remission.
The Court directed that the accused would remain in prison for the rest of his natural life.

Key Takeaways from the Judgment

Death Penalty Requires Consideration of Mitigating Factors: The judgment reaffirms that the death sentence should not be imposed without assessing the convict’s potential for reformation.
Importance of Fair Sentencing Hearings: The case underscores the need for effective legal representation during the sentencing phase.
Solitary Confinement as a Supervening Circumstance: Prolonged solitary confinement and its impact on mental health were significant factors in commuting the sentence.
Circumstantial Evidence in Capital Cases: The Court reiterated that in cases based solely on circumstantial evidence, the death penalty should be applied with caution.

Conclusion

The Supreme Court’s decision in Md. Mannan vs. State of Bihar provides a significant precedent in death penalty jurisprudence. While upholding the conviction, the Court reinforced the principle that the death sentence should be reserved for the most extreme cases where rehabilitation is impossible. The ruling ensures that sentencing remains just and proportionate, upholding the rights of the accused while acknowledging the gravity of the crime.

Petitioner Name: Md. Mannan @ Abdul Mannan.
Respondent Name: State of Bihar.
Judgment By: Justice N.V. Ramana, Justice Mohan M. Shantanagoudar, Justice Indira Banerjee.
Place Of Incident: Bihar.
Judgment Date: 14-02-2019.

Don’t miss out on the full details! Download the complete judgment in PDF format below and gain valuable insights instantly!

Download Judgment: Md. Mannan @ Abdul M vs State of Bihar Supreme Court of India Judgment Dated 14-02-2019.pdf

Direct Downlaod Judgment: Direct downlaod this Judgment

See all petitions in Murder Cases
See all petitions in SC/ST Act Case
See all petitions in Judgment by N.V. Ramana
See all petitions in Judgment by Mohan M. Shantanagoudar
See all petitions in Judgment by Indira Banerjee
See all petitions in partially allowed
See all petitions in Modified
See all petitions in supreme court of India judgments February 2019
See all petitions in 2019 judgments

See all posts in Criminal Cases Category
See all allowed petitions in Criminal Cases Category
See all Dismissed petitions in Criminal Cases Category
See all partially allowed petitions in Criminal Cases Category