State of Maharashtra v. Vijay Mohan Jadhav & Ors
In the High Court of Bombay
Confirmation Case 2/2014
Before Justice Sadhana S. Jadhav and Justice Prithviraj K. Chavan
Decided on November 25, 2021

Relevancy of the Case: Confirmation of death sentence in a case involving gang rape and recording of the act

Statutes and Provisions Involved

• The Information Technology Act, 2000 (Section 67)
• The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Section 235(2), 28(2), 428)
• The Indian Penal Code, 1860 (Section 120B, 376E, 354A, 354B, 341, 342, 323, 506, 201)

Relevant Facts of the Case

• A young journalist wanted to photograph old structures in Mumbai. She and her male colleague arrived at Shakti Mills, near the Mahalaxmi Railway Station. Two accused persons directed them towards the mill’s location.
• They were at the mill for 45 minutes and clicked pictures. The accused persons overpowered the male colleague and tied his hands.
• Five accused persons committed rape on her, including vaginal, oral, and anal intercourse. One of the accused persons also recorded this incident.
• The Mumbai Sessions Court awarded the death penalty to the accused persons.
• The court appointed a lawyer since the respondent-accused persons had no representation before the High Court.

Prominent Arguments by the Advocates

 The petitioner’s counsel:

• Irregularity of framing charges is curable under Section 215(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. Time is not of the essence in deciding the conviction. The court should not involve mitigating circumstances as it does not set the clock back, and the accused persons did not have remorse.

The respondents’ counsel:

• It is essential to uphold the rule of law. For the charge of Section 376E, the accused did not have enough time to present their mitigating circumstances as a defence. This is a gross violation of the due process of law, along with Article 21.

Opinion of the Bench

• Poverty and the young age of the accused persons are not mitigating circumstances. The court noted that there was a conspiracy among the accused persons.
• Life imprisonment is the rule, and death penalty is the exception.

Final Decision

• The bench set aside the death sentence; however, upheld the conviction in all other offences.

Marc Pereira, an undergraduate student at Rizvi Law College, Mumbai, prepared this case summary during his internship with The Cyber Blog India in January/February 2022.