4 min readNew DelhiUpdated: Aug 26, 2026 03:02 PM IST
Four years ago, a young Odisha woman had just given birth. This was her second child.
But she would not live to see her child grow up. Three days later, she was dead, stabbed 49 times by her husband, who then tried to kill the first child – a six-year-old girl – by cutting her throat.
And then he ran away. He was eventually caught, tried, and sentenced to death.
But now the Orissa High Court has commuted the sentence – after an appeal filed by the man – to a life sentence requiring 35 years in jail before his release can be considered. The crime, the bench of Justice Manash Ranjan Pathak and Justice Sashikanta Mishra admitted, was ‘extremely barbaric (and) brutal’, but did not meet the ‘rarest of rare’ rule to hand down a death sentence.
“It is difficult to envisage the condemned prisoner returning home after spending only 10 more years in prison or thereabouts… to his daughters, one of whom he attempted to kill.”
“Looking at the tender age of the two children – 10 and four – we feel that their future, in the absence of their parents, needs to be secured to the extent possible,” the court said Tuesday.
In its published order, the court also admitted that “no amount of monetary recompense can assuage their loss and the lingering trauma for the rest of their lives… yet a reasonably adequate sum as compensation would afford protection… help build their lives as decently as possible.”
Story continues below this ad
Thus, in addition to the Rs 5 lakh given by the District Legal Services Authority, which is to be kept in FDs till the children are of age, the court directed the state to pay each child Rs 10 lakh.
Justices Manash Ranjan Pathak and Sashikanta Mishra commuted the death sentence of a man convicted of murdering his wife.
Stabbed 49 times: ‘temporary rage’ or ‘rarest of the rare’
The defence argued that most of the stab wounds were aimed at vital parts of the body and were not that deep. It also argued that there was no real motive or sign of premeditation.
The defence claimed a domestic spat had been ‘blown out of proportion’, and that the man had acted as he did because of ‘temporary insanity borne out of uncontrolled anger’.
The court was urged to be lenient because the man had no prior criminal history – and so the death penalty was not justified – and because his conduct in jail since has been ‘exemplary’, indicating a possibility of reformation.
Story continues below this ad
The prosecution argued that the exceptional depravity and brutality of the man’s actions – from the attack on the woman to the attempted killing of the girl – made this a ‘rarest of the rare’ case.
No remission before 35 years
The court held that the prisoner should not be eligible for consideration for remission under the law unless he had served a minimum of 35 years in prison in total. It directed that the period of imprisonment already undergone shall be set off against the above period.
Along with the Rs 5 lakh awarded by the DLSA, to be kept in fixed deposits until they attain majority, the court directed the state to pay Rs 10 lakh each to the two daughters, observing that although no amount could compensate for the loss of their parents and the trauma they faced, adequate compensation could secure their future.