'Barbarity Dripping From Every Ounce': MP High Court Confirms Death Penalty For Rape, Murder Of 5-Yr-Old
The Madhya Pradesh High Court has affirmed the order of a Special Court convicting a man and sentencing him to death penalty for raping and murdering a five-year-old girl. The division bench of Justice Vivek Agarwal and Justice Ramkumar Choubey observed that the accused used a knife inside the victim's vagina to enlarge it, making it easier for penetration on an infant girl. Further, the...
The Madhya Pradesh High Court has affirmed the order of a Special Court convicting a man and sentencing him to death penalty for raping and murdering a five-year-old girl.
The division bench of Justice Vivek Agarwal and Justice Ramkumar Choubey observed that the accused used a knife inside the victim's vagina to enlarge it, making it easier for penetration on an infant girl. Further, the accused murdered the girl and put her dead body in a plastic tank in the bathroom for 2-3 days awaiting a chance to dispose of the dead body somewhere.
The bench observed,
"This shows that a barbarity of act is dripping down from every ounce of evidence... After considering the aforesaid facts, the age of the appellant/accused, his marital status having wife and children and socio-economic background, it cannot be termed as mitigating circumstances. The facts of the case in hand, when examined from both, the offender's and the offence's point of view, it leads to a conclusion that this is a case which must fall in a rarest of rare category".
Per the facts of the case, the mother of the victim reached out to the Station House Officer in Shahjahanabad on September 24, 2024, claiming that her 5-year-old daughter was missing. During the investigation, a search operation was conducted wherein the police personnel noticed a disgusting smell. The police, thus, forcibly re-entered the said flat, wherein the body of a little girl was kept in a plastic water tank in the bathroom.
The counsel for the appellant/convicted contended that the offence could have been committed by some unknown person and that he was incriminated without any foundation or evidence. It was contended that he was not the owner of the flat where the dead body was discovered, and further raised doubts over the seizure memo.
The counsel for the State contended that there was ample evidence connecting the appellant to the crime and that the prosecution had proved its case beyond all reasonable doubt.
The bench observed that this was a case of sexual assault in a barbarous manner in which the victim succumbed to the injuries. The bench noted that the lodging of the missing report, recovery of the dead body from the appellant's home, along with seizure of blood-stained articles and memorandum are proved by direct evidence on record.
The court also relied on statements of the parents, noting that,
"Merely a fact that these witnesses being parents of the deceased girl-child are interested witnesses, they cannot be disbelieved. As the victims of their five-year-old daughter's brutal slaying, they have no motive or reason to provide false testimony that would implicate an innocent person while letting the true perpetrator to remain free".
Further, the court held that the evidence goes beyond mere needle of suspicion but shows a complete unbroken chain of circumstances that establishes with absolute certitude that the appellant was responsible for the sexual assault and death of the infant victim.
The court noted that the appellant had gagged the mouth of the victim and thereafter used a knife to enlarge her vagina. Thereafter, he sexually assaulted the child, who died due to the injuries. The bench emphasized, "Use of knife inside the vagina to enlarge it for easing penetration on an infant girl is a barbarous act of lusty mind".
Thus, the bench held that this case was fit for the rarest of the rare category and affirmed the death penalty of the appellant.
The bench also highlighted, "sovereign objective of sentencing remains the assurance that crime meets its just desert, thereby satiating the cry for justice emanating from both the victim and the collective conscience of society. The courts must engage in a delicate balancing act, weighing the totality of circumstances. It is a mandatory judicial exercise to juxtapose aggravating factors against mitigating pleas to arrive at a sentence that is not merely legal, but fundamentally just".
Case Title: Atul Nihale v State of MP [Cr. A. No.3732/2025 & CRRFC-2/2025]