Woman Gets 10-Year Jail For Facilitating Rape, Delhi High Court Cites Continued Criminal Conduct
The Delhi High Court has sentenced a woman to 10 years of rigorous imprisonment for facilitating the commission of rape, while emphasising her continued involvement in criminal activities as a key factor in denying leniency.
Justice Chandrasekharan Sudha passed the order on sentence in an appeal filed by the State challenging her acquittal, holding that the convict had played an “active and deliberate role” in the offence.
The Court noted that she lured the victim, remained present during the commission of rape, and subsequently threatened her.
During the hearing on sentence, the convict sought a lenient view on the ground that she had faced a prolonged trial, had remained in custody for about nine months, and had a five-year-old child with no one to care for her.
However, the Court declined to reduce the sentence observing,
“Even after the commission of the present offence, the conduct of the respondent/convict has not shown any reformation. On the contrary, as brought on record, she has been subsequently involved in multiple criminal cases, including in Section 302 IPC and is presently in judicial custody. This indicates a continuing pattern of criminal behaviour rather than an isolated incident. The subsequent involvement of the convict in grave offences demonstrates that the respondent/convict has not stopped engaging in criminal activities.”
The Court further reiterated that where a statute prescribes a minimum sentence, courts cannot impose a lesser punishment, regardless of mitigating factors such as prolonged trial or personal circumstances.
Accordingly, the Court sentenced the convict to 10 years' rigorous imprisonment under Section 109 read with Section 376 IPC, along with a fine of ₹70,000.
The Court also recognised the “trauma” suffered by the survivor, who fought for justice for over a decade, and directed that ₹50,000 from the fine be paid to her as compensation.
Appearance: Mr. Utkarsh, APP for State; Mr. Deepak Jakhar, Advocate alongwith respondent in person.
Case title: State v. Sweety
Case no.: CRL.A. 1078/2018