‘Hear her final scream’: Judge’s powerful order in Pune toddler rape-murder case

Special Judge Salunkhe awarded three death sentences, ruling that: “The judicial conscience of this court leads to the irresistible conclusion that the only punishment the accused can deserve is the death sentence.”

‘Perceive with its Senses’

Before delivering the verdict on sentencing, the judge said: “This court has not only to ‘consider’ but ‘perceive with its senses’ the ‘facts’ brought on record. This court must keep its senses alive to hear the last scream of the child, which was loud enough, recorded in an audio-video CCTV camera. This court shall perceive by its senses, 18 injuries inflicted on that small child. This court shall perceive by its senses the suffering of the child when she was being sexually assaulted…

This court shall perceive by its senses, that CCTV footage wherein that innocent child walks her small steps happily with the accused, reposing trust on him. She was eager to see the beauty of the new life of a calf. She was, however, unaware that it was going to cost her own life and it was her last journey in her life. The court shall perceive by its senses, the feelings of the parents of the victim standing at the door of the court waiting for justice to their beloved daughter.”

The court also observed: “The injuries noted in the post-mortem report of the victim would reflect inhuman behaviour of the accused with a child of just three years of age. Whatever the accused wanted to do with that child, he did fearlessly, most barbarically, and without bothering with its consequences. This is probably because he had past experience that even if he is prosecuted, nothing will happen in court.”

Noting the public outrage in the case, the court said: “Thousands of people from all sections of the society came on the Mumbai-Bangalore National Highway with the body of the victim child with their demand that the accused shall be handed over to them, as they want to do justice with him. They had no trust in the law-enforcing agencies. It is a matter of introspection into why such public perception develops.”

Overloaded truck and four-seater car with five passengers

The court observed, “As regards criminal courts, the overloaded truck may have strength to sustain the load but it cannot run a race with four-seater cars carrying five passengers therein. This case fortunately got an opportunity to travel in a four-seater car as a fifth passenger.”

Elaborating on the truck and car metaphor, the court observed: “This case may be an exception to the growing public perception that the law-enforcing authorities do not work to their expectations. The investigating agency came with full strength, coordinated with each other, collected strong material before it disappeared, and submitted the charge sheet just within 16 days from the date of the offence.

That was the period of summer vacation and this court had already adjourned hearing cases after vacation. Therefore, it was practicable to avail full judicial time of the Court only for this case. The learned SPP and the learned LADC (Legal Aid Defence Counsel) came with their professional commitment to proceed with the trial of this case. Thus, the pre-trial stages were quickly completed and the trial proceeded and it was concluded within 16 days from its commencement.

The post-trial stages were also completed quickly and today, the sentence is being passed within a month of commencement of trial and within two months from the date of the offence. However, this will not happen in each and every case.”

Before pronouncing the sentence, the judge placed on record his appreciation for the collective effort behind the trial.

He commended the police for their round-the-clock investigation and coordination, witnesses for their patience and cooperation, and the special Public Prosecutor, legal aid defence counsel, and their teams for completing the examination of 55 witnesses in 16 days without seeking a single adjournment.

He also praised the defence counsel’s thorough cross-examination, expert witnesses for their timely scientific analysis, and the court staff for their tireless support, describing the trial as a remarkable example of teamwork in the administration of justice.