Think about changing the policy to include serial rape of a minor to the list of “heinous crimes”: High Court

The Punjab and Haryana High Court has requested that the State review the policy dated July 8, 1991, due to the fact that it does not designate serial rape with a child victim as a “heinous crime,” which might lead to the early release of convicted individuals.

The claim was made by High Court Justice Nidhi Gupta in a case where a father was found guilty of raping his stepdaughter many times. It is significant to note that, for the purposes of premature release, serial rape with a young victim is not included in the list of “heinous crimes” as defined by the policy of July 8, 1991. The Bench noted that the State could take another look at it in order to address situations like the one in which the petitioner was found guilty of repeatedly raping his 12-year-old stepdaughter between 2004 and 2008.

The fact that the petitioner had also gotten the girl pregnant was also noted by Justice Gupta. It was too late to end the pregnancy by the time the situation became public. “It is impossible to even begin to understand the pain that the little child experienced. The victim was not only forced to become a mother while still a kid, but she also endured the worst type of abuse—that too from a father-like character in whom the little child would typically place confidence. The judge noted this.

A petition against the “State of UT Chandigarh, and others respondents” was being heard by Justice Gupta on behalf of the convicted party. Among other things, he was asking for the revocation of an order from the Chandigarh Administration’s Under-Secretary for Home, which had denied his request for an early release in December of last year. Additionally, as the petitioner had already served the “required sentence as per policy dated July 8, 1991,” directions to release him were requested from the respondents.

Justice Gupta went on to say that the state would not be exaggerating when it said that the victim will be permanently damaged as a result of the petitioner’s conduct of the current offense. Therefore, it was necessary to rectify the policy’s July 8, 1991 defect. Judge Gupta dismissed the plea and said, “It may be recommended that prisoners should not be held entitled to premature release in cases of heinous offenses like the present one.”