Sharks of Law
Case Law

Analysis of Bhaggi @ Bhagirath @ Naran v. The State of Madhya Pradesh: A Legal Perspective

Adv Vipul Singh Raghuwanshi
Adv Vipul Singh Raghuwanshi Mar 10, 2024 • 100024 Views

On February 5, 2024, the Supreme Court sentenced a man to 30 years in jail for raping a seven-year-old girl, stating the fact that he did not perform the offense brutally does not make it non-barbaric, and the incident may haunt the victim for life.

Consult Verified Legal Experts

A bench of Justices CT Ravikumar and Rajesh Bindal directed that the petitioner-convict Bhaggi @ Bhagirath @ Naran not be released from jail until he had served his actual sentence of 30 years, including the period he had served unless the trial court ordered that the prison term be set off.

The court upheld the conviction under Section 376AB of the IPC, with an additional fine of Rs one lakh to be paid to the victim while amending the Madhya Pradesh High Court's ruling that lowered the sentence from the death penalty to life imprisonment.

Facts of the case:

According to the prosecution, the convict took the victim, aged 7 years, to a temple, and there, after making her and himself nude, he committed rape. The High Court did not confirm the capital punishment granted for the conviction under Section 376 AB of the IPC, hence it was reduced to life imprisonment. Partly accepting SLP, the Supreme Court ruled that the convict was 40 years old on the day of the incident, whereas the victim was only 7 years old. Thus, the position is that he utilized a 7-year-old girl to gratify his lust. For that, the criminal took the victim to a temple, unaware of the holiness of the location, disrobed her and himself, and then performed the crime.

Procedural History:

The prosecution witnesses' oral statements (PWs 1, 2, and 14) on the convict's responsibility were supported by medical evidence that pointed unequivocally to his guilt. Because of his conviction, he received the death penalty.

The petitioner was also convicted under Section 376 (2) (i) of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) and under Sections 3/4, Sections 5(d)/6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (POCSO Act), but the trial Court did not impose separate sentences for the aforementioned offenses.

The High Court modified the death sentence to life imprisonment, however, another alternative punishment was also possible: harsh imprisonment for at least 20 years with a fine.

Court’s Observation:

The Supreme Court ruled that if the victim is devout, every visit to any temple may remind her of the tragic, cruel acts to which she was exposed. Also, the incident may haunt her and harm her future marital life. The petitioner-convict shall not be released from jail until his genuine 30-year term has been completed.

The Court even makes the distinction between the words barbaric and brutal. Barbaric means Wild; uncivilized; crude whereas Brutal means Characteristic of or like a brute; cruel; savage.  Barbarians means one whose state of culture is between savagery and civilization.

In this case, the petitioner-convict was 40 years old when the incident occurred, while the victim was only a 7-year-old girl.  The concern is that he utilized a 7-year-old girl to gratify his sexual needs.  The petitioner-convict violated the sanctity of a shrine by disrobing himself and the victim before committing the crime.  Even if he did not commit the act brutally, the commission remains barbaric.

In this case, the court found that there is no debate about the need for a deterrent penalty for a conviction under Section 376 AB of the IPC. It also stated that once a conviction is upheld under Section 376 AB of the IPC, the fixed-term sentence cannot be less than 20 years.

It also relied on the judgment in the case of 'Shiva Kumar @ Shiva @ Shivamurthy Vs State of Karnataka' (2023) which stated, “Even if capital punishment is not imposed or proposed, the Constitutional Courts can always impose a modified or fixed-term sentence by directing that a life sentence, as contemplated by "secondly" in Section 53 of the IPC, be for a fixed period of more than fourteen years, for example, twenty years. The fixed punishment cannot be less than 14 years following Section 433A of the Cr.P.C."

For extra updates, you could contact Sharks of Law. The Sharks of Law provides knowledge on legal issues and encourages readers to think critically about the issue. You can contact our experienced Advocates for any legal questions

Email:-helpdesk@sharksoflaw.com

Help Desk:-+91-88770-01993 

Tags: Legal Help Consultation
Share:

Adv Vipul Singh Raghuwanshi

Legal expert and contributor at Sharks of Law. Committed to providing clear and accessible legal guidance to everyone.

Other Articles

Places Of Worship ACT:- All About It
Jan 27, 2025

Places Of Worship ACT:- All About It

The objective behind passing Places of Worship Act, 1991, was to prohibit the co...

Read Article
Chandigarh First City To Implement New Criminal Laws
Jan 21, 2025

Chandigarh First City To Implement New Criminal Laws

Last month, Prime Minister Narendra Modi, announced the implementation of three...

Read Article