Calcutta High Court Commutes Death Penalty of Man Who Raped Minor, Burned Her Dead Body

Calcutta High Court Commutes Death Penalty of Man Who Raped Minor, Burned Her Dead Body. The Division Bench comprising Justices MD Shabbar Rashidi and Debangsu Basak reviewed a criminal revision petition seeking commutation of the appellant’s death sentence for the rape and murder of a minor girl. While affirming the appellant’s conviction, the Court emphasized that capital punishment must be reserved for only the most exceptional cases, and opted instead to impose life imprisonment without remission for 20 years.

The appellant had been found guilty under Sections 376(2)(i)(k), 302, and 201 of the IPC, alongside Section 6 of the POCSO Act. The victim, a girl aged approximately 14–15 years, had been employed at the appellant’s residence for over two years. Upon being informed by the appellant that the girl had fallen seriously ill, her relatives rushed to his home and discovered her charred body in the bathroom. This led to the filing of an unnatural death case and a subsequent charge sheet following investigation.

The forensic evidence established that the girl had been strangled before her body was burned, and that she had endured repeated sexual assault. The Court found the appellant’s failure to offer any explanation regarding the victim’s death—despite their cohabitation—highly incriminating under Section 106 of the Evidence Act. The prosecution’s evidence left no doubt about his culpability.

However, when it came to sentencing, the Bench took into account relevant mitigating factors. The appellant, aged 58, had no prior criminal record, nor any mental or behavioral irregularities. Referencing Supreme Court jurisprudence on the rare imposition of the death penalty, the Court held that although the crime was horrific, the conditions for imposing capital punishment were not fulfilled. Consequently, the death sentence was substituted with life imprisonment, mandating that the appellant serve at least 20 years behind bars without eligibility for remission.
 

Case details: [Srimanta Tung v. State of W.B., CRA No. 684 of 2018, decided on 24-6-2025]