Summary
The Court preserved the appellant’s rape and other Penal Code convictions but set aside the separate life sentence under the unamended atrocities provision. For the1995 offence, proof that the victim was targeted on the ground of her caste was required and absent; the later knowledge-based amendment did not govern.
Issues
- Whether the evidence satisfied the pre-amendment caste-based ground required by section3(2)(v).
- What consequence followed for the separate Penal Code convictions and release.
Held
- For this1995 occurrence, the unamended section3(2)(v) required proof that the qualifying offence was committed on the ground of the victim’s Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe status. Evidence that rape was committed on that ground was absent. (¶¶ 5, 7–8)
- The Court distinguished the amendment effective26January2016, replacing the caste-based-ground language with knowledge of the victim’s status. That later standard did not apply to the earlier occurrence. (¶ 6–7)
- The victim’s and her husband’s testimony and medical evidence supported concurrent rape findings, and no perversity warranted disturbing the Penal Code convictions or their sentences. (¶¶ 4, 10)
Result
Appeal partly allowed. Section3(2)(v) conviction and life sentence set aside; rape conviction, ten-year term and other Penal Code convictions and sentences confirmed. Having served more than ten years, appellant ordered released forthwith unless required in another case.