Delhi court sentences man to life imprisonment for raping five-year-old girl on Bhai Dooj | Delhi News

NEW DELHI: A Delhi court recently sentenced a man to life imprisonment for raping and assaulting a five-year-old girl at Bhai Dooj in 2019.

The court found that child sexual abuse is a crime against humanity and society, and highlighted the long-term psychological consequences for victims.

In addition to the life sentence, the convict was given an additional seven-year prison term for kidnapping and grievous bodily harm, and was also fined Rs 50,000 in three sections.

The case stems from an FIR filed in the North-West District in 2019. In delivering the verdict, the court relied on psychologist Renee Fredrickson and pointed out the profound emotional damage inflicted on child victims of sexual abuse.

Additional Magistrate (POCSO) Sushil Bala Dagar observed, “In cases of sexual abuse, children feel and process the anger, pain, shame and sense of perversion projected by the perpetrator. They absorb these feelings into their inner being and are severely traumatised by the emotions that accompany the assault as well as by the assault itself.”

Sentencing the convict to life imprisonment under Section 6 of the POCSO, Justice Dagar stressed that violations of this Act must be punished with appropriate punishment to act as a deterrent. She said, “The cases of sexual assault on children are examples of perverted lust for sex where even innocent children are not spared in search of sexual gratification. Children are the most valuable human resources and the future of our nation.”

Judge Dagar stressed the vulnerability of children in India and the need for their protection by all societal institutions. “The future of India lies in children, but it is a great misfortune that children, including minor girls and boys, are in an extremely vulnerable position,” she said. “Persons like the convict use various methods to exploit the children, including sexual assault and sexual abuse. Such exploitation through sexual abuse of children is a crime against humanity and society.”

Stressing the duty to protect abused children from further psychological trauma, the court noted: “In a patriarchal society like ours, everyone is quick to blame the child in such an incident of sexual assault. A child who is subjected to sexual abuse needs to be protected even more so that no one can abuse him psychologically.”

Regarding society’s responsibility, the court stated: “It is the responsibility of society as a whole to care for its children and to protect them from physiological and psychological exploitation by sex offenders.”

The court expressed its dismay at the increasing number of crimes against children and referred in particular to the trauma suffered by the five-year-old victim. “The five-year-old girl, who went to her maternal grandparents’ house for the Bhai Dooj festival, was supposed to be having a joyful time but was treated with animalistic passion by the convict. Her dignity and the purity of her body were destroyed. The plight of the child and the shock suffered by her and her family members are well imaginable. The agony suffered by the child can destroy the composure and self-control of any civilized person.”

The court regretted that the child’s innocence was overshadowed by the heinous act of the convicted man. “The statement that the child is a gift to society seems absurd in the face of a person such as the convicted man. The victim child had to endure such torture at the hands of the convicted man through no fault of her own,” it said.

However, the psychological impact on the victim was also acknowledged, noting: “For the convicted person, the sexual offence may be an isolated act, but it has a profound impact on the life of an innocent child.”

In order to have a deterrent effect, the court stated: “The punishment imposed on the convicted person should be proportionate to the gravity of the heinous act so that it serves as an effective deterrent to like-minded persons. However, the mitigating circumstances should not be lost sight of in determining the sentence.”

The convict’s lawyer highlighted the convict’s age, his unmarried status, his illiteracy and his low income before imprisonment. The convict had supported his family by working as a labourer and earning Rs 9,000 per month: “The convict is about 28 years old. He is unmarried. He is illiterate and worked as a labourer and earned Rs 9,000 per month before his imprisonment. The convict has parents, three unmarried brothers and three unmarried sisters. The convict is the eldest and supported his parents by working as a labourer.”

On the contrary, the Additional Public Prosecutor (APP) of the state, assisted by counsel for DCW, pleaded for the maximum sentence to deter potential offenders. “The convict should be given the maximum sentence so that like-minded persons in the society are deterred from committing such heinous and despicable offences,” the APP stated.

The APP further explained the gravity of the crime: “The convict has been convicted of the offence under Section 6 of the POCSO Act and the offence under Section 363/325/376(2)(j)/376AB IPC which he committed on the victim who was a child aged only five years. The convict has committed aggravated offence of penetrative sexual assault on the victim child ‘K’ after abducting the victim child ‘K’ when she was going to the toilet.”

Details of the attack were given, with references to the physical harm inflicted: “The convict grabbed her and led her away, punched the victim, broke two of the victim’s front teeth and also bit her left cheek. The scar of the bite is still visible on the face of the victim, who appeared today with his father,” the APP added.

Stressing the need for substantial compensation, the APP demanded, “The convict deserves no pity for his heinous and reprehensible act. The child victim should be awarded maximum compensation as per Delhi Victims Compensation Scheme, 2018. The child victim has suffered a lot of humiliation due to such act by the convict and is currently around 10 years old.”

In addition to the sentence, the court awarded the victim compensation of Rs 105,000, thereby recognizing the serious impact of the attack.

(The identity of the victim has not been disclosed to protect her privacy, in accordance with Supreme Court guidelines in sexual assault cases.)
(With agency contributions)