New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Tuesday (January 28) acquitted a man who was on death row for raping and killing a 23-year-old Mumbai techie in 2014, saying it was extremely unsafe to sustain his conviction.
A bench comprising Justice BR Gavai, Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra and Justice KV Viswanathan , while acquitting Chandrabhan Sudam Sanap, said there was gaping hole in the story of the prosecution and there is more than meets the eye.
Appellant is not guilty of the offence and he be set free: Apex Court
The bench, while examining the evidence, further said that it was extremely unsafe to sustain Sanap’s conviction in the case.
“We hold appellant is not guilty of the offence and he be set free. He is not guilty. He is acquitted,” the bench said.
According to the prosecution, Sanap kidnapped the woman techie and then he raped and killed her. It was further alleged that he burnt the techie’s body at a secluded place.
What did the trial court say?
A special women’s court awarded death penalty to Sanap in 2015 for raping and murdering the software engineer, who hailed from Andhra Pradesh, saying that the accused had acted with extreme brutality and committed the offence in a pre- planned and a diabolical manner. It further observed that the Society’s abhorrence to the crime of rape and murder which had compelled the legislature to introduce death penalty itself proved that “rarest of rare” case is implied in it when the offence of murder while committing rape is punishable with death.
What did the Bombay High Court say?
Sanap challenged the trial court order before the Bombay High Court, which confirmed the trial court order awarding death penalty for the crime.
“Merely because his behaviour as an under trial prisoner is good and satisfactory, can be no ground to absolve him of the most gruesome and cruel act which he has indulged into. Such a person would surely remain a menace to the Society and in this backdrop, we are of the firm view that there are no extraneous mitigating circumstances available on record which may justify imposition of sentence less than a death sentence which the learned Sessions Court has imposed,” the High Court said and added, “We record that the case of the appellant deserves to be falling in the category of ‘Rarest of Rare’ and it also amounts to devastation of social trust, shocks the social conscience and calls for an extreme penalty of capital punishment.”
Aggrieved by the High Court verdict, Sanap moved the Supreme Court challenging his conviction and death penalty imposed on him.
