Kerala HC Upholds Death Penalty To A Man Accused Of Rape And Murder Of 9-Yr-Old Girl [Read Judgment]

Kerala HC Upholds Death Penalty To A Man Accused Of Rape And Murder Of 9-Yr-Old Girl [Read Judgment]

She expected him to behave to her like a father. He smothered her, prevented her from crying, raped her and in the process committed murder, the bench said.

The Kerala High Court recently confirmed death sentence of a man accused of rape and murder of a 9-year-old girl, who was his daughter’s friend.

On her way to madrassa, the girl went to her friend’s home, so as to go along with her. The prosecution case is that the father of her friend was alone at the house at that time and he committed rape on her, strangled and smothered her and she died. According to the prosecution, the dead body was hidden beneath the cot in the bedroom of the accused and later he had shifted the dead body to the bathroom with an intention was to dispose of the dead body in the septic tank situated in the said house compound. The Trial Court, Manjeri, convicted Abdul Nassar and sentenced him to death.

A division bench of Justice AM Shaffique and Justice P Somarajan dismissed his appeal, observing that the evidence is overwhelming and it points out only to the commission of the crime by the accused, his complicity in the crime is very well proved.

Observing that the crime is so brutal and shocking to the judicial mind as well as the community at large, the bench while confirming the death penalty, said: “Circumstances relating to the case are aggravating. A child aged 9 years goes to her friend's house to call her to accompany to the Madrassa. She is taken into the house and becomes a prey to a male aged 45 years. She expected him to behave to her like a father. He smothered her, prevented her from crying, raped her and in the process committed murder. He kept the dead body under his cot. Thereafter it was taken and dumped in a bathroom with an intention to conceal it in the septic tank. There are no mitigating circumstances to take it outside the purview of rarest of rare case.”

Read the Judgment Here