Gang Rape and Murder Case: Supreme Court Converts Remainder-of-Life Sentence to 25 Years

The Supreme Court recently upheld the conviction of a man in a 2019 case of gang rape and murder but modified his sentence from imprisonment for the remainder of his life to a fixed term of 25 years without remission.

A bench of Justices Ahsanuddin Amanullah and K Vinod Chandran partly allowed the appeal filed by Shaik Shabuddin against the judgment of the Telangana High Court, which had upheld his conviction and that of two others but had commuted his death sentence to life imprisonment for the remainder of his life.

According to the prosecution, on November 24, 2019, the deceased, who was the wife of the complainant, had been dropped by her husband at Yellapatar village to carry on their work of selling utensils. When she did not return and her phone calls went unanswered, she was reported missing.

A complaint was lodged with the police, following which a search was conducted by the police along with the husband and other relatives. Her dead body was found the next day.

During the trial, all three accused (A1 to A3) were convicted for offences under Sections 302 and 376D read with Section 34 of the IPC and Section 3(2)(v) of the SC/ST Act. They were sentenced to death and life imprisonment respectively, along with a fine of Rs 5,000.

The prosecution alleged that the three accused followed the deceased while she was walking towards the village. In an isolated area, they allegedly dragged her into bushes and raped her one after the other, despite her resistance. It was further alleged that to ensure they were not identified later, A1 slit her throat while A2 and A3 held her hands and legs.

The trial court relied on several circumstances, including the “last seen together” theory. The high court also held that since no explanation was offered by the accused about being seen together with the deceased, this provided an additional link in the chain of circumstances under Section 106 of the Indian Evidence Act.

However, the Supreme Court observed that there was no evidence to show that the accused were acquainted with the deceased. It held that the “last seen together” theory could not strictly apply, though it was clear that the accused and the deceased were present in the same vicinity shortly before the crime.

The bench noted that the prosecution had clearly established that the accused were in the same area as the deceased just before the rape and murder. It also relied on medical evidence, which showed that the death was homicidal. The postmortem recorded 14 ante-mortem injuries, which conclusively proved that the victim had been raped.

Court held that the medical evidence, the time of death, the presence of the accused in the same vicinity, and their failure to prove an alibi during questioning under Section 313 of the CrPC together formed a complete chain of circumstances to sustain the conviction under Sections 302 and 376D read with Section 34 of the IPC.

At the same time, the bench was not convinced that any offence under the SC/ST Act was made out. While the prosecution had proved the caste of the victim, the court found no material to show that the accused were aware of her caste or that they were acquainted with her in any manner.

Court said that knowledge of the victim’s caste was an essential requirement under the provisions of the SC/ST Act invoked in the case, and this ingredient had not been established.

The bench noted that the high court had rightly considered mitigating circumstances such as the appellant being around 40 years old at the time of the offence, having a family with four children and aged parents, and having no prior criminal record, while commuting the death sentence.

However, the Supreme Court held that the sentence of imprisonment for the remainder of the appellant’s life could be modified to a fixed term of 25 years without remission.

Court also noted that all three accused were convicted and sentenced in the same manner. Since the other two accused had not filed appeals, the Registry was directed to forward a copy of the judgment to the Member Secretary of the Telangana Legal Services Authority to ensure that legal assistance is provided to them to approach the Supreme Court through the Supreme Court Legal Services Committee.

Case Title: Shaik Shabuddin Vs State of Telangana

Bench: Justices Ahsanuddin Amanullah and K Vinod Chandran