Read Time: 06 minutes

Synopsis

The Madhya Pradesh High Court has recently modified the life sentence of Lalla Yadav, convicted of raping a mentally underdeveloped minor, from life imprisonment to 20 years of rigorous imprisonment.

A Division bench of Justice Vivek Agarwal and Justice Devnarayan Mishra, presiding over the Jabalpur bench of the High Court, delivered the verdict, taking into account the mitigating factor that the accused is married with four children to support.

The court, while reducing the sentence, stated: “learned trial Court has not given any reason for awarding life imprisonment for remainder of life and looking to the fact that appellant is married person, he was going through his youth and at the time of commission of offence, his age was 33 years, he has 4 children and a family to support, some leniency be shown in the matter of sentence.”

The prosecutrix, a minor with a 60% mental disability, alleged that the accused/ appellant, who was her neighbour, sexually abused her. Evidence including a disability certificate and school records showed her age to be between 14 to 15 years at the time of the incident. Additionally, forensic evidence confirmed the presence of the appellant’s DNA, including his sperms, on the victim’s vaginal slide.

The accused was convicted by the First Additional Sessions Judge, Shahdol, under Section 5(k) (committing penetrative sexual assault on child after taking advantage of the child's mental or physical disability) of the Prevention of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act and Section 376(2)(L) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). He was sentenced to life imprisonment for the remainder of his natural life and fined Rs. 20,000.

The accused challenged the trial court’s judgment contending that he was innocent and the trial court failed to justify sentencing the accused to life imprisonment without parole. The accused appealed for leniency, emphasising his age (33 years at the time of the offence), marital status, and familial obligations of supporting 4 children. He further highlighted delay in filing of the First Information Report (FIR).

The court noted that while the conviction under the POCSO Act and IPC was supported by evidence, the trial court had not provided sufficient reasoning for imposing a life sentence for the remainder of the appellant's natural life.

Though the court acknowledged that Section 6 of the POCSO Act prescribes a minimum sentence of 20 years, which could be extended to life imprisonment, it noted that mitigating factors such as the appellant’s family responsibilities warranted a reduction in sentence.

On account of these considerations, the court reduced the appellant’s sentence from life imprisonment for sentence for remainder of his natural life to a period of 20 years. The fine amount was kept intact.

 

Cause Title: Lalla Yadav v State of MP [CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 785 of 2015]

Appearance: Advocate Ram Prakash Yadav (for the appellant); Government Advocate Ajay Tamrakar (for the State).