Case Comment on State of Up vs. Sanjay Kumar, (2012) Scc 537
STATE OF UP vs. SANJAY KUMAR, (2012) SCC 537
Death sentence has always been a question of controversy, while on one hand it becomes a matter of human rights with respect to the accused; on the other hand it is one of weighing the gravity of the crime and its impact on the society. However, in the wake of the recent gang rape that took place in the city of Delhi, society has voiced strong opinion to award death sentence to the perpetrators. In the said case the death of the rape victim has led to imposition of section 302, IPC that prescribes the punishment for murder.
The crime of rape simpliciter does not attract death penalty under the current provisions of law. In fact the maximum punishment which can be sentenced under Section 376, IPC is life imprisonment. As an established rule death penalty can only be awarded in the “rarest of the rare” cases.
It may also be reinstated beforehand that causing the death of a person itself does not necessarily lead to imposition of death sentence. The court takes into consideration both aggravating and mitigating circumstances, a line of thought that has developed over the years in various judicial pronouncements. State of U.P. vs. Sanjay Kumar is also such a judgment which throws light on the judicial discourse which is relevant for understanding the working of law and sentencing decisions. The brief fact of the case is as follows:
The accused Sanjay Kumar was working as a white wash worker in the house at Varanasi in which the victim Divya Rani was residing with her uncle and aunt. The Eighteen-year-old Divya Rani was raped and murdered in February 2007 by the accused while she was supervising the work of whitewash in the absence of the said uncle and aunt. The accused was seen trying to hide Divya's body in a tin box when the family returned. The post mortem report clearly showed that there was sexual assault. In the above case the High Court commuted the death sentence, given by the Trial Court, to life
Death sentence has always been a question of controversy, while on one hand it becomes a matter of human rights with respect to the accused; on the other hand it is one of weighing the gravity of the crime and its impact on the society. However, in the wake of the recent gang rape that took place in the city of Delhi, society has voiced strong opinion to award death sentence to the perpetrators. In the said case the death of the rape victim has led to imposition of section 302, IPC that prescribes the punishment for murder.
The crime of rape simpliciter does not attract death penalty under the current provisions of law. In fact the maximum punishment which can be sentenced under Section 376, IPC is life imprisonment. As an established rule death penalty can only be awarded in the “rarest of the rare” cases.
It may also be reinstated beforehand that causing the death of a person itself does not necessarily lead to imposition of death sentence. The court takes into consideration both aggravating and mitigating circumstances, a line of thought that has developed over the years in various judicial pronouncements. State of U.P. vs. Sanjay Kumar is also such a judgment which throws light on the judicial discourse which is relevant for understanding the working of law and sentencing decisions. The brief fact of the case is as follows:
The accused Sanjay Kumar was working as a white wash worker in the house at Varanasi in which the victim Divya Rani was residing with her uncle and aunt. The Eighteen-year-old Divya Rani was raped and murdered in February 2007 by the accused while she was supervising the work of whitewash in the absence of the said uncle and aunt. The accused was seen trying to hide Divya's body in a tin box when the family returned. The post mortem report clearly showed that there was sexual assault. In the above case the High Court commuted the death sentence, given by the Trial Court, to life