The Indian Supreme Court is set to review the validity of a law regarding punishment for the gang rape of a minor. This comes after a petition was filed by a 29-year-old man who is currently serving a life sentence for such a crime. The law in question allows for two possible sentences, life imprisonment or a death penalty. However, the petitioner argues that the law does not provide an opportunity for reform and rehabilitation.
Objections Raised in the Petition
The petition argues that Section 376DB of the Indian Penal Code, which addresses the gang rape of a child below 12 years, limits the options of a trial judge to either sentencing the convicted person to life imprisonment or the death penalty. In other words, this means life imprisonment is the minimum mandatory punishment for this crime.
The petitioner also pointed out an inconsistency in the sentencing system brought about by the August 2018 amendments. While Section 376-AB stipulates a minimum sentence of 20 years for raping a girl under 12, Section 376-DB mandates a minimum life imprisonment for gang rape of a girl under 12 years of age. For both, the maximum punishment can extend to the death penalty. As per the petitioner, this could mean spending between 60-70 years in prison for a person who commits the crime in his twenties.
Arguing Violation of Constitutional Rights
The petition asserts that Section 376DB infringes Articles 21 (Right to life) and Article 14 (right to equality) of the Constitution since it fails to offer an alternative to a life sentence or the higher punishment of the death penalty.
Global Perspective on Life Imprisonment
In international law, there have been cases where life imprisonment without parole has been challenged. The European Court of Human Rights ruled in Winter vs the United Kingdom that life imprisonment without a realistic opportunity for parole violated Article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights. Similarly, the US Supreme Court declared in certain cases that disproportionate sentences violated the Eighth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, which prohibits cruel and unusual punishment.
The Supreme Court’s Stance
The Indian Supreme Court stated that it needed to consider this issue, considering it had previously ruled out mandatory death sentences as unconstitutional. Both the petitioner and an additional solicitor general were asked to provide written submissions on the matter.
Historical Context
In 1983, the Supreme Court deemed Section 303 of IPC unconstitutional as it stipulated the mandatory death penalty for a person who committed murder while serving a life sentence. At present, there is no alternative sentencing available in such cases.
Related Child Protection Measures in India
There are several initiatives in place to protect children including the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POSCO), Child Abuse Prevention and Investigation Unit, “Beti Bachao, Beti Padhao” campaign, Juvenile Justice Act/Care and Protection Act, 2000, Child Marriage Prohibition Act (2006) and the Child Labour Prohibition and Regulation Act, 2016.
