Source:Kerala High Court

Why in News?

Recently the Kerala High Court in the matter of State of Kerala v. Muhammed Ameer-Ul Islam while applying the Rarest of Rare Test confirmed the death sentence awarded to the accused.

• The High Court observed that the case was deeply disturbing and represented a severe violation of human dignity and sanctity of life since after committing rape in an inhumane manner, the victim was murdered horrendously.

What was the Background of State of Kerala v. Muhammed Ameer-Ul Islam Case?

• In this case, the accused who is a native of Assam was a migrant labourer. He was residing during April 2016 at Vaidyasalapadi near Perumbavoor. The accused was aged 22 years then.
• On 28^th April 2016, the victim, a 30 year old law student was alone in the house during daytime, as her mother had gone to visit on that day, some of her acquaintances.
• When the mother returned home by about 8.30 p.m., the front door of the house was found to be locked from inside and there was no response from the victim when she was called out.
• When the Sub Inspector of Police entered the house through the back door, he found the body of the victim in the middle room lying in a pool of blood, half naked with grievous injuries throughout her body. A part of the internal organs of the victim was also seen pulled out.
• The investigation in the case revealed that it was a case of rape and murder committed by the accused, and final report was accordingly submitted in the case.
• The accused in the case stands convicted for the offences punishable under Sections 449, 342, 376, 376A and 302 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC).
• The Trial Court found the accused guilty of the offences punishable under and sentenced him, to death. The accused is deeply aggrieved by his conviction and sentence.
• Thereafter, challenging his conviction, a criminal appeal was filed before the Kerala High Court.
• Dismissing the criminal appeal, the death sentence awarded to the accused is confirmed.

What were the Court’s Observations?

• The division bench comprising Justices P.B. Suresh Kumar and S. Manu observed that the case was deeply disturbing and represented a severe violation of human dignity and sanctity of life since after committing rape in an inhumane manner, the victim was murdered horrendously. The Court found that the case has far-reaching consequences since it creates fear and vulnerability amongst women.
• The Court further observed that awarding the ultimate penalty of death sentence to the accused in the case would serve as a resolute deterrent to those who would consider perpetrating such abhorrent acts in future, so that persons similarly placed like the victim who are innumerable in our society, would live with a sense of security and without fear.
• The Court concluded this judgment with the celebrated statement made by the Nobel Laureate, Alexander Solzhenitsyn, “Justice is conscience, not a personal conscience, but the conscience of the whole humanity”.

What is the Rarest of Rare Test?

Introduction

• There is no statutory definition of rarest of rare.
• It depends upon facts and circumstances of a particular case, brutality of the crime, conduct of the offender, previous history of his/her involvement in crime.
• The capital punishment in India is based on the rarest of rare case.

Rarest of Rare Cases:

• The expression rarest of rare cases was coined by the Supreme Court in the case of Bachan Singh v. State of Punjab, (1980) and since then, life imprisonment is the rule and death penalty the exception as in India it is awarded only in the gravest of cases.
• The principles laid down in Bachan Singh were summarized by a three Judge Bench of the Supreme Court later in the case of Machhi Singh v. State of Punjab, (1983). The following propositions emerge from Bachan Singh case:
  • The extreme penalty of death need not be inflicted except in gravest cases of extreme culpability.
  • Before opting for the death penalty, the circumstances of the offender also require to be taken into consideration along with the circumstances of the crime.
  • Life imprisonment is the rule and death sentence is an exception. In other words death sentence must be imposed only when life imprisonment appears to be an altogether inadequate punishment having regard to the relevant circumstances of the crime, and provided, and only provided, the option to impose sentence of imprisonment for life cannot be conscientiously exercised having regard to the nature and circumstances of the crime and all the relevant circumstances.
  • A balance sheet of aggravating and mitigating circumstances has to be drawn up and in doing so the mitigating circumstances have to be accorded full weightage and a just balance has to be struck between the aggravating and the mitigating circumstances before the option is exercised.

Scope of the Rarest of Rare Test:

• In Jagmohan Singh v. State of U.P (1973), the Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of the death penalty, holding that it is not merely a deterrent but marks the rejection of the crime on the part of the society.
• The Supreme Court held that according to Article 21 of the Constitution of India, 1950 (COI) deprivation of life is constitutionally permissible if that is done according to the procedure established by law. Thus, the death sentence imposed after a trial in accordance with legally established procedures is not unconstitutional under Article 21.

Dimensions of the Rarest of Rare Test:

• According to the Supreme Court, the crime must be viewed from different angles such as the manner of committing the murder, the motive for the murder, the anti- social or socially abhorrent nature of the crime and the horrors and personally of the victim of the murder.
• Generally, Courts award life imprisonment to convict in a murder case. Only in rarest of rare cases murder convicts are given death penalty.