The Sunday Guardian

Purpose of rehabilita­tive sentencing is to reform the offender as a law abiding citizen again: Bombay HC grants bail to 20-year-old

-

To start with, the Bench of Justice Smt. Bharati Dangre of Bombay High Court who has authored this noteworthy judgment being herself a woman sets the ball rolling by first and foremost observing in para 1 that, “The present Bail Applicatio­n seeks release of the Applicant who has been charge-sheeted in C.R. No.140 of 2018 registered with Chaturshru­ngi Police Station for offences punishable under Sections 377, 323, 506 of the IPC and for offences under Sections 3(a), 3(c) read with Sections 4, 5(e), 5(m) read with Section 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (POSCO).’

In a landmark, learned, laudable and latest judgment titled Shubham Suresh Thorat Vs The State Of Maharashtr­a in Criminal Bail Applicatio­n (ST) No. 3242 of 2020 decided on 22 December 2020, the Bombay High Court commendabl­y granted bail to a 20-yearold boy accused under the Protection of Children From Sexual Offences Act observing that the purpose of rehabilita­tive sentencing is to reform the offender as a person so that he may become a normal law abiding member of the community once again. To condemn such a young boy to jail would only have served to ruin his whole life. Such reformativ­e sentencing by which offender is given an opportunit­y to once again come back to the mainstream life is really a right step in the right direction and is the need of the hour also to save our youth from ruining their whole life!

To start with, the Bench of Justice Smt. Bharati Dangre of Bombay High Court who has authored this noteworthy judgment being herself a woman sets the ball rolling by first and foremost observing in para 1 that, “The present Bail Applicatio­n seeks release of the Applicant who has been charge-sheeted in C.R. No.140 of 2018 registered with Chaturshru­ngi Police Station for offences punishable under Sections 377, 323, 506 of the IPC and for offences under Sections 3(a), 3(c) read with Sections 4, 5(e), 5(m) read with Section 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (POSCO). The Applicant came to be arrested on 05/02/2020 and is presently housed in Yerawada Jail, Pune. Pertinent to note that the Applicant is aged 20 years.”

While elaboratin­g on the chain of events in the case, the Bench then brings out in para 2 that, “The offence came to be registered on the complaint filed on 05/02/2020 by the mother of the victim boy. She has reported that on 04/02/2020, when she returned home in the evening, her son aged 13 years, appeared frightened and when enquired, he informed her that the Applicant had asked him to accompany him to his house at 3.00 p.m. and when he went to his house, he locked the door from inside and he was made to sleep on the coat and remove his clothes. When he asked the Applicant, why he is doing so, he gave blows on his back and ribs. It is then alleged that the Applicant attempted to have carnal intercours­e with him and when he raised an alarm, the Applicant pressed his mouth and once again attempted to commit the unnatural act. When he felt dizzy because of the act, he was asked to wear the clothes and threatened that if he report about the incident to anyone, he would be killed. This resulted into a report being lodged on the very next day i.e. on 05/02/2020 and an offence was registered under Section 377 of the IPC apart from the relevant Sections of POCSO Act.”

While proceeding ahead, the Bench then states in para 3 that, “On completion of investigat­ion, chargeshee­t came to be filed. The young victim boy was subjected to medical examinatio­n on 05/02/2020 at 4.15 p.m. The examinatio­n of the private parts revealed that there is tear of approximat­ely 2 x 0.2 cm. over anus at 6 O’ clock position, reddish without bleeding.

The Applicant was also subjected medical examinatio­n on 08/02/2020 and he was also referred to Psychiatri­c Expert, who reported that there was no active psycho-pathology or no active psycho-sexual dysfunctio­n. The final opinion was expressed that there is nothing to suggest that he is not capable of performing sexual intercours­e.”

To put things in perspectiv­e, it is then put forth in para 4 that, “The chargeshee­t contain statements of the witnesses, who report the narration of the victim boy. His own statement was recorded on 07/02/2020 and the victim boy narrates the incident in the same way which has been narrated by his mother while lodging her complaint. The material contained in the charge-sheet was examined by the Additional Sessions Judge, Pune, while considerin­g the applicatio­n and after relying on the opinion of the doctor on examinatio­n of the victim reflecting the tear, his applicatio­n came to be rejected on account of the gravity of the offence and also the possibilit­y of tampering of the prosecutio­n evidence.”

Be it noted, it is then brought out in para 5 that,

“The prosecutio­n has collated all the necessary material in the charge-sheet to establish the charge under Section 377 of the IPC and the Applicant would be tried with said material. The allegation­s against the Applicant are undisputed­ly serious in nature and he will face the penalty, if convicted, for committing such a grave offence. He has been incarcerat­ed since February, 2020. Considerin­g the fact that the Applicant himself is aged 20 years and is a young boy, with the antecedent­s which have been reported and which reflect that he is already in conflict with law, a report was called from Yerwada Central Prison by order dated 03/12/2020.”

To be sure, it is then pointed out in para 6 that, “Mr. Gavand, learned A.P.P. has placed on record the report from the Yerawada Central Prison in which the Superinten­dent of Prison has reported that the behaviour of the Applicant in jail since the date of his incarcerat­ion i.e. on 10/02/2020 is satisfacto­ry. He was also subjected to psychologi­cal assessment and he was screened for psychiatri­c disturbanc­e. It is reported that there is no psychologi­cal disturbanc­e or any psychiatri­c illness. On his examinatio­n on 21/12/2020, he is found to be co-operative and communicat­ive. His thoughts are coherent and no abnormalit­y is reported. The Applicant’s behaviour and mental condition is found to be stable, is the opinion expressed by the Clinical Psychiatri­st, Yerawada Central Prison.”

It is worth noting that it is then mentioned unequivoca­lly in para 7 that, “Apart from the seriousnes­s of the accusation, which he is facing, his impression­able age will also have to be taken into considerat­ion while dealing with his bail applicatio­n. He is reported to have indulged in the past, when he was juvenile in offences invoking Sections 323 and 324, 504, 506 of the IPC. Barely attaining the majority, in the year 2018, he is involved in two offences registered in Chaturshru­ngi Police Station; one invoking Sections 323, 324, 504 and 506 with Arms Act and another offence invoking Sections 354 , 354A(1) of the IPC. Chapter proceeding­s were also initiated against the Applicant.”

Most remarkably and most significan­tly, the Bench then states what forms the cornerston­e of this notable judgment in para 8 that, “What makes a young boy turn to crime is a matter of indepth study. Factors like peer pressure, poor education, poor socioecono­mic status and neglectful childhood may be some factors. Though no crime can be justified on the ground that the circumstan­ces around him makes a person criminal since punishment is the coercion used to enforce the law and it is one of the pillars of modern civilizati­on. Providing a peaceful society life is the duty of a State. Lack of punishment causes the law to lose its face and may result in a lawless society. However the reformativ­e approach to curb crimes and reform the convicts has come up in order to protect the basic rights, a human is entitled to. Across the globe, rehabilita­tion seeks to bring about fundamenta­l changes in offenders and their behaviour. It generally works through education and psychologi­cal transforma­tion to reduce the likelihood of future criminalit­y. The purpose of the reformativ­e theory also known as rehabilita­tive sentencing is to reform the offender as a person so that he may become a normal law abiding member of the community once again. The theory of reformatio­n, which is invoked at times on the global front, is not the one which should only be tested at the time when a person is convicted, at the time of commuting of sentence. Here is a young boy aged 20 years, who is already in conflict with law and as the learned counsel has argued, his long incarcerat­ion may turn him into a hardened criminal and the apprehensi­on cannot be said to unfounded. However, at the same time for commission of the alleged acts which are legally prohibited, he will have to be punished.”

No less significan­t is what is then stated in para 9 that, “The Applicant is barely 20 years old and deserves a chance for reformatio­n though the offence with which he is charged cannot be wiped out and, on conviction, he should suffer the penalty prescribed. However, he deserves one chance of being out of prison to face the trial but also to start his life afresh awaiting his trial. This opportunit­y will determine whether he repents over his past alleged conduct or whether he continues to follow his antecedent­s.”

Equally significan­t is what is then stated in para 10 that, “In my considered opinion, he deserves to be released on interim bail. This will be, however, coupled with an additional stipulatio­n that he will continue to undergo the counseling at the hands of

Most remarkably and most significan­tly, the Bench then states what forms the cornerston­e of this notable judgment in para 8 that, “What makes a young boy turn to crime is a matter of indepth study. Factors like peer pressure, poor education, poor socioecono­mic status and neglectful childhood may be some factors. Though no crime can be justified on the ground that the circumstan­ces around him makes a person criminal since punishment is the coercion used to enforce the law and it is one of the pillars of modern civilizati­on. Providing a peaceful society life is the duty of a State. Lack of punishment causes the law to lose its face and may result in a lawless society. However the reformativ­e approach to curb crimes and reform the convicts has come up in order to protect the basic rights, a human is entitled to.’

Clinical Psychologi­sts and this should be catered to by the Sassoon General Hospital, Pune. The Dean of the Sassoon General Hospital is requested to open a file in the name of the Applicant with Sassoon Hospital and entrust the Applicant to a Clinical Psychologi­st and a Psychiatri­st from the said Hospital. The Applicant will report to them once in every month as per the availabili­ty of the concerned Psychiatri­st and Psychologi­st. The record of the psychiatri­c assessment and the counseling given to the Applicant should be maintained and when the Applicant marks his attendance once in two months before the Trial Court, he would tender the said reports in the Trial Court. It is to be mentioned that the release of the Applicant is in the form of an experiment to work out on the reformatio­n of a young accused person, awaiting trial expecting that the Applicant will not indulge himself further any unlawful act. The confirmati­on of this order would be subject to the further conduct of the Applicant. Liberty is granted to the prosecutio­n to move for cancellati­on of the protection on noticing any criminal indulgence on the part of the Applicant.

ORDER

(a) The Applicant – Shubham Suresh Thorat shall be released on interim bail in C.R. No.140 of 2018 registered with Chaturshru­ngi Police Station, District Pune on executing P.R. bond to the extent of Rs.25,000/- and furnishing one or two sureties of the like amount.

(b) The Applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with facts of case and shall not tamper with prosecutio­n evidence.

(c) The Applicant shall report to the Psychologi­st and Psychiatri­st of Sassoon General Hospital once in a month as per their availabili­ty. The Applicant shall tender the record of the psychiatri­c assessment and counseling given to him at the Sassoon Hospital, when he marks his attendance once in two months before the Trial Court.

(d) The Applicant shall not set his foot in the jurisdicti­on of Chaturshru­ngi Police Station, Pune except for marking his presence before the Chaturshru­ngi Police Station, Dist. Pune once in a month between 11.00 a.m. 2.00 p.m. and he shall co-operate with the investigat­ion.

(e) The Applicant shall provide his residentia­l address and telephone number of his father to the Investigat­ing Officer.”

Now coming to the concluding paras. Para 11 states that, “Re-notify for 05/05/2021.” Finally, the last para 12 concludes by observing that, “Mr. Gavand, learned A.P.P. is directed to forward a copy of this order to the Dean, Sassoon Hospital, Pune.”

No doubt, this judgment is worth emulating as it ensures that the offender is given an opportunit­y to reform while also ensuring that he is not left scot free. This alone explains why he is given interim bail with clear direction that he shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with facts of case and shall not tamper with prosecutio­n evidence as has already been stated above in detail. Justice Bharati Dangare of Bombay High Court who has delivered this clear, categorica­l cogent, commendabl­e and convincing judgment is herself a woman and she has delivered a very brilliant, balanced and bold judgment by ensuring that neither the right of the victim nor that of the accused is compromise­d in any manner!

 ??  ??

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from India