SHYAM NARAINversusTHE STATE OF NCT OF DELHI

                    [2013] 8 S.C.R. 951


                      SHYAM NARAIN                             A
                             v.
              THE STATE OF NCT OF DELHI
            (Criminal Appeal No. 1860 of 2010)
                      MAY 15, 2013
                                                               B
     [DR. 8. S. CHAUHAN AND DIPAK MISRA, JJ.]

    Penal Code, 1860 - s. 376(2)(f) - Rape of a girl aged 8
years - Conviction and sentence of life imprisonment by
courts below - Held: Evidence of prosecutrix and that of the   C
doctor medical evidence and conduct of the accused prove
the commission of rape by the accused - Therefore,
conviction and sentence upheld.

     Sentence/Sentencing - Sentence for the offence of rape    D
- Principle of proportionality between the offence committed
and the penalty imposed, are to be kept in view - In the
present case, in view of the manner in which the offence was
committed, it demands just punishment - Accused not
entitled to reduced punishment - Sentence of life
                                                               E
imprisonment upheld.

      Appellant-accused was prosecuted u/s. 37(2)(f) IPC
for having raped an eight years old girl. Trial court
convicted him on the basis of the version of the
prosecutrix and the medical evidence and sentenced him         F
to life imprisonment. High Court affirmed the conviction
as well as sentence.
     In the special Leave Petition, notice was issued
limited to the quantum of punishment. The accused              G
pleaded leniency in punishment on the basis of mitigating
circumstance viz., the accused has four children
depending on him.

                            951                                H
    952      SUPREME COURT REPORTS              [2013] 8 S.C.R.


A         Dismissing the appeal, the Court

      HELD: 1. The unimpeachable evidence of the
  prosecutrix, the testimony of the treating physicians, the
  medical evidence and the conduct of the accused go a
B long way to show that the accused had raped the
  prosecutrix in a cruel and brutal manner and the
  conviction recorded on that score by the trial Judge
  which has been given stamp of approval by the High
  Court cannot be faulted. [Para 9] [959-E-F]
C      2.1. Sentencing for any offence has a social goal.
  Sentence is to be imposed regard being had to the nature
  of the offence and the manner in which the offence has
  been committed. The fundamental purpose of imposition
  of sentence is based on the principle that the accused
D must realise that the crime committed by him has not
  only created a dent in his life but also a concavity in the
  social fabric. The purpose of just punishment is designed
  so that the individuals in the society which ultimately
  constitute the collective do not suffer time and again for
E such crimes. It serves as a deterrent. True it is, on certain
  occasions, opportunities may be granted to the convict
  for reforming himself but it is equally true that the principle
  of proportionality between an offence committed and the
  penalty imposed are to be kept in view. While carrying out
F this complex exercise, it is obligatory on the part of the
  Court to see the impact of the offence on the society as
  a whole and its ramifications on the immediate collective
  as well as its repercussions on the victim. [Para 11] [960-
  B-F]
G     2.2. Respect for reputation of women in the society
  shows the basic civility of a civilised society. No member
  of society can afford to conceive the idea that he can
  create a hollow in the honour of a woman. Such thinking
  is not only lamentable but also deplorable. It should be
H paramount in everyone's mind that, on one hand, the
 SHYAM NARAIN v. THE STATE OF NCT OF DELHI            953


society as a whole cannot preach from the pulpit about A
social, economic and political equality of the sexes and,
on the other, some pervert members of the same society
dehumanize the woman by attacking her body and
ruining her chastity. It is an assault on the individuality
and inherent dignity of a woman with the mindset that she B
should be elegantly servile to men. Rape is a monstrous
burial of her dignity in the darkness. It is a crime against
the holy body of a woman and the soul of the society and
such a crime is aggravated by the manner in which it has
been committed. [Para 22] [966-D-H]                          c
      2.3. The legislature, while prescribing a minimum
sentence for a term which shall not be less than ten years,
has also provided that the sentence may· be extended
upto life. The legislature, in its wisdom, has left it to the
discretion of the Court. In the present case, the eight year D
old girl, who was supposed to spend time in
cheerfulness, was dealt with animal passion and her
dignity and purity of physical frame was shattered. The
plight of the child and the shock suffered by her can be
well visualised. The torment on the child has the E
potentiality to corrode the poise and equanimity of any
civilized society. [Para 22] [965-G-H; 966-A-C]

     2.4. It demands just punishment from the court and
to such a demand, the courts of law are bound to F
respond within legal parameters. It is a demand for
justice and the award of punishment has to be in
consonance with the legislative command and the
discretion vested in the court. The mitigating factors put
forth by the appellant are meant to invite mercy but the G
factual matrix cannot allow the rainbow of mercy to
magistrate. Hence, the judgment of conviction and the
order of sentence passed by the High Court is sustained.
[Para 22] [967-B-D]
                                                            H
    954      SUPREME COURT REPORTS             [2013] 8 S.C.R.


A        Jameel vs. State of Uttar Pradesh (2010) 12 SCC 532:
    2009 (15) SCR 712; Shailesh Jasvantbhai and Anr. vs. State
    of Gujarat and Ors. (2006) 2 sec 359; 2006 (1) SCR 477;
    State of M.P. vs. Babula/ AIR 2008 SC 582: 2007 (12) SCR
    795; Gopa/ Singh vs. State of Uttarakhand 2013 (2) SCALE
B   533; Madan Gopa/ Kakkad vs. Naval Dubey and Anr. (1992)
    3 SCC 204: 1992 (2) SCR 921 ; State of Punjab vs. Gurrnit
    Singh and Ors. AIR 1996 SC 1393: 1996 (1) SCR 532; State
    of Kamataka vs. Krishnappa (2000) 4 SCC 75: 2000 (2) SCR
    761; Jugendra Singh vs. State of Uttar Pradesh (2012) 6 SCC
c   297: 2012 (6) SCR 193 - relied on.
                        Case Law Reference:
          2009 (15) SCR 712        relied on          Para 12
          2006 (1) SCR 477         relied on          Para 13
D
          2007 (12) SCR 795        relied on          Para 14
          2013 (2) SCALE 533       relied on          Para 15
          1992 (2) SCR 921         relied on          Para 17
E         1995 (4) Suppl. SCR 48 relied on            Para 18
          1996 (1) SCR 532         relied on          Para 19
          2000 (2) SCR 761         relied on          Para 20

F         2012 (6) SCR 193         relied on          Para 21

        CRIMINAL AP PELLATE JURISDICTION : Criminal Appeal
    No. 1860 of 2010.

        From the Judgment & Order dated 12.02.2009 of the High
G   Court of Delhi at New Delhi in Criminal Appeal No. 772 of
    2006.

        Mohan Pandey, Lal Singh Thakur, Tabrez Ahmad, Parvez
    Dabas for the Appellant.
H
  SHYAM NARAIN v. THE STATE OF NCT OF DELHI                  955


     Paras Kuhad, ASG, Harsh Prabhakar, Swati Vijaywergiah,          A
Chetan Chawla, Satya Siddiqui, D.S. Mahra, Anil Katiyar for
the Respondent.

     The Judgment of the Court was delivered by

     DIPAK MISRA, J. 1. The wanton lust, vicious appetite,           B
depravity of senses, mortgage of mind to the inferior
endowments of nature, the servility to the loathsome beast of
passion and absolutely unchained carnal desire have driven the
appellant to commit a crime which can bring in a 'tsunami' of
shock in the mind of the collective, send a chill in the spine of    C
the society, destroy the civilized stems of the milieu and
comatose the marrows of sensitive polity. It is brutal rape of an
eight year old girl. The sensitive learned trial Judge, after
recording conviction under Section 376(2)(f) of the Indian Penal
Code (for short "IPC"), had taken note of the brutality meted out    D
to the child and sentenced him to undergo rigorous
imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs.5000/- failing which
to undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months. The Division
Bench of the Delhi High Court has equally reflected its anguish
over the crime by describing it as "pervaded with brutality" and     E
"trauma which the young child would face all her life" and has
concurred with the sentence of imprisonment and the fine.

      2. This Court, at the time of issuance of notice, had
restricted it to the quantum of sentence. However, we shall dwell
                                                                     F
upon the merits of the case in brief.

     3. The horrid episode as unfurled by prosecution is that
on 29.10.2003, about 6.30 p.ni., an eight year old child,
daughter of one Binda Saha, was taken by the appellant to Lal
Bahadur Shastri Hospital and from there, being referred, she         G
was admitted in GTB Hospital, Shahdara, at 1.30 a.m. on
30.10.2003. The young girl, as recorded in MLC Ext.PW-10/
D, had stated that she had fallen down in the toilet about 2.00
p.m. on 29.10.2003 as a consequence of which she had
sustained the injuries. The treating doctor, Dr. Anju Yadav, was     H
    956     SUPREME COURT REPORTS                  [2013] 8 S.C.R.


A not convinced with what was being narrated to her. As the
  factual narration would reflect, the duty constable informed the
  local police station, i.e., P.S. Kalyanpuri, about the admission
  of the young girl (hereinafter whom we shall refer to as 'M') and
  her condition, as recorded in the MLC. The child remained in
B the hospital for six days and thereafter she was discharged. The
  anxious mother, unable to digest the story that was told to her
  by the daughter, asked her to muster courage and tell the truth
  to her. The young 'M' gained confidence and, eventually, on
  10.11.2003, broke down before her mother and told her how
c the appellant had brutally raped her and threatened her that if
  she disclosed the said fact to anyone, her life as well as the
  lives of her parents would be in danger. The disturbed father
  proceeded to the police station and informed what was told by
  his daughter and, accordingly, an FIR was registered. After the
  criminal law was set in motion, the investigating agency
0
  arrested the accused and, eventually, the accused-appellant
  was sent up for trial. The accused pleaded innocence and
  claimed to be tried.

       4. The prosecution, in order to establish the charge levelled
E against the accused, examined 11 witnesses including the
  child 'M', her parents, the doctors and other formal witnesses.
  The accused in his statement under Section 313 of the Code
  of Criminal Procedure stated that on 28.10.2003, the parents
  of 'M' had gone to see her maternal uncle and, therefore, he
F had taken the prosecutrix 'M' to the hospital for medical aid,
  but as Lal Bahadur Shastri Hospital refused on the ground that
  the prosecutrix should be taken to some big hospital, he took
  her to GTB Hospital for medical treatment. It was his further
  explanation that he took the girl to the hospital for saving her
G life and he was not aware that she had been raped. The
  allegation of threat was disputed by the accused. It is also his
  stand that initially the child had not named him being asked by
  the doctor and had stated that she had sustained the injuries
  by fall, and after the discharge of the child, he went to attend
H his work on 4.11.2003. Be it noted, the defence chose not to
  SHYAM NARAIN v. THE STATE OF NCT OF DELHI                   957
              [DIPAK MISRA, J.]

adduce any evidence.                                                 A

      5. The learned trial Judge, considering the entire evidence
on record and the contentions raised on behalf of the accused,
came to hold that the version of the prosecutrix could be relied
upon in entirety and by no stretch of imagination it could be said
                                                                     B
that she was a tutored witness; that the delay in lodging the FIR
was not at all fatal to the case of the prosecution as the child
was in a tremendous state of panicky; that the factum of rape
has been clearly proven from the medical evidence and the
testimony of the doctors which have remained unimpeachable
despite roving cross-examination; that no plea of any hostility      C
or previous animosity had been suggested to the child or to her
parents; that the presence of the accused in the house had
remained unexplained; and that no suggestion had been given
to any of the doctors who were cited by the prosecution that
the injuries could be caused by fall. Considering the entire         D
evidence in detail, the learned trial Judge found the accused
guilty of the offence under Section 376(2)(f) IPC and sentenced
him as has been stated hereinbefore.

     6. In appeal, the High Court took note of number of factors,    E
narrating the condition of the child, the revelation of the tragic
treatment by the accused, the circumstances under which the
FIR was lodged, the testimony of the prosecutrix as to how she
had been raped in a cruel manner by the accused, the absence
of any reason of his going to the house of young 'M' and the         F
circumstances under which he could see the injured child, the
credibility and unimpeachability of the evidence of the child 'M',
the courage that was gradually gathered by the child after
getting out of the state of fear and trauma, the evidence of the
doctors which showed the physical condition of the victim and        G
the conduct of the accused in the hospital and, on the said
basis, concurred with the view expressed by the learned trial
Judge.

     7. We have heard learned counsel for the appellant, and
Mr. Paras Kuhad, learned Additional Solicitor General, and Mr.       H
    958       SUPREME COURT REPORTS                  [2013] 8 S.C.R.


A   B.V. Bairam Dass, learned counsel appearing for the NCT of
    Delhi.

        8. To consider the defensibility of the judgment of
  conviction rendered by the learned trial Judge and affirmed by
B the Division Bench, it is necessary to appreciate the nature of
  injuries suffered by the victim. True it is, the young child had told
  the doctors that she had suffered a fall but the same was not
  given credence to by the treating doctors. The MLC where the
  condition of the young child was recorded is as follows: -

c         "O/E-Apprehensive look, G.C. fair, pallor mild, P-96/m, BP
          110/80, heart NAO. No bruises seen on the body. Breasts
          and secondary sexual characters not developed. P/A Soft,
          lever spleen not palpable. No shifting dullness, no area of
          tenderness. UE - On separation of labia, a tear of 1.5
D         approx. to 2 cm. seen from posterior fourchette towards
          anus just 1 cm. short of anal opening and same tear
          extending upto hymen. Clot was seen in her vagina, anal
          opening was intact, no area of bruise seen on perineum.
          Bleeding per vagina was present. Decision for
E         examination under anaesthesia and repair of vaginal
          perennial tear taken. Patient was admitted in septic labour
          room and shifted to gynae emergency operation theatre.
          On examination under anaesthesia, showed same findings
          as above but in addition a tear of 3 cm approximately was
F         seen in left vaginal wall from hymen into the vagina.
          Bleeding was positive. Apex of tear seen, tear stitched in
          layers, cervix seen healthy, no bleeding through OS. In view
          of EUA, findings under anaesthesia high index of
          suspicion of sexual assault was made although the child
          and her uncle were denying of any such episode."
G
       9. Dr. Sapna Verma, PW-4, who examined the victim,
  found that the hymen of the child 'M' was torn. The victim has
  deposed that about 1.00 p.m. in the afternoon, on the date of
  the incident, the accused-appellant came to the house and gave
H her an intoxicating drink and took her into a room. He raped
  SHYAM NARAIN v. THE cSTATE OF NCT OF DELHI                     959
              [DIPAK MISRA, J.]

   her and also gave threat that if she would tell her parents or        A
  any other person, he would inflict knife blows upon her and her
  family members. He had further told her that she should tell her
  parents that she received the injuries when she slipped in the
  toilet. It has also come in her evidence that the accused took
  her to the hospital while she was bleeding from her private            B
  parts. She has·fruthfully spoken that initially she told her parents
  that she ha9 'sustained injuries as a result of a fall in the toilet
  because sfie was terribly scared and thereafter she spoke out
  how she<sustained the injuries. In her cross-examination, she
  has stpod embedded in her version. The time gap between the            c
  occurrence and the accused taking the child to the hospital has
  its ©wn significance. The child was bleeding from her private
  p~rts. Had the child been left to herself, she would have bled
  \o death: The accused took her to the hospital to avoid a
 ;situation when somebody might have come hearing her cry and            0
f saved-her life and she might have ultimately spoken the truth.
  The totality of the circumstances would show that he was with
  the-child. It is interesting to note that the accused had not
  disclosed why he had gone to the house of the child 'M' and
  under what circumstances he took the child to the hospital. The
                                                                         E
 ~unimpeachable evidence of the child 'M', the testimony of the
·treating physicians, the medical evidence and the conduct of
  the accused go a long way to show that the accused had raped
  the child 'M' in a cruel and brutal manner and the conviction
  recorded on that score by the learned trial Judge which has
  been given stamp of approval by the High Court cannot be               F
  faulted.

     10. Presently, we shall proceed to deal with the justification
of the sentence. Learned counsel for the appellant, would
submit that though Section 376(2) provides that sentence can             G
be rigorous imprisonment for life, yet as a minimum of sentence
of ten years is stipulated, this Court should reduce the
punishment to ten years of rigorous imprisonment. It is urged
by him that the appella~t is a father of four children and their
lives would be ruined if the sentence of imprisonment for life is        H
    960       SUPREME COURT REPORTS                   [2013] 8 S.C.R.


A affirmed. Mr. Paras Kuhad, and Mr. B.V. Bairam Dass, counsel
  for the State, submitted that the crime being heinous, the
  sentence imposed on the accused is absolutely justified and
  does not warrant interference. It is also canvassed by them that
  reduction of sentence in such a case would be an anathema
B to the concept of just punishment.

        11. Primarily it is to be borne in mind that sentencing for
  any offence has a social goal. Sentence is to be imposed
  regard being had to the nature of the offence and the manner
  in which the offence has been committed. The fundamental
C purpose of imposition of sentence is based on the principle that
  the accused must realise that the crime committed by him has
  not only created a dent in his life but also a concavity in the social
  fabric. The purpose of just punishment is designed so that the
  individuals in the society which ultimately constitute the collective
D do not suffer time and again for such crimes. It serves as a
  deterrent. True it is, on certain occasions, opportunities may be
  granted to the convict for reforming himself but it is equally true
  that the principle of proportionality between an offence
  committed and the penalty imposed are to be kept in view.
E While carrying out this complex exercise, it is obligatory on the
  part of the Court to see the impact of the offence on the society
  as a whole and its ramifications on the immediate collective
  as well as its repercussions on the victim.

F      12. In this context, we may refer with profit to the
  pronouncement in Jameel v. State of Uttar Pradesh\ whereio
  this Court, speaking about the concept of sentence, has laid
  down that it is the duty of every court to award proper sentence
  having regard to the nature of the offence and the manner::in
G which it was executed or committed. The sentencing courts are
  expected to consider all relevant facts and circumstances
  bearing on the question of sentence and proceed to impose a
  sentence commensurate with the gravity of the offence."


H   1.   (2010) 12 sec 532.
     SHYAM NARAIN v. THE STATE OF NCT OF DELHI                961
                 [DIPAK MISRA, J.]
    13. In Shailesh Jasvantbhai and another v. State of              A
Gujarat and· others2, the Court has observed thus:

       "Friedman in his Law in Changing Society stated that:
       "State of criminal law continues to be - as it should be -a
       decisive reflection of social consciousness of society."      B
       Therefore, in operating the sentencing system, law should
       adopt the corrective machinery or deterrence based on
       factual matrix. By deft modulation, sentencing process be
       stern where it should be, and tempered with mercy where
       it warrants to be. The facts and given circumstances in
       each case, the nature of the crime, the manner in which it    C
       was planned and committed, the motive for commission
       of the crime, the conduct of the accused, the nature of
       weapons used and all other attending circumstances are
       relevant facts which would enter into the area of
       consideration".                                               D

     14. In State of M.P. v. BabulaP, two learned Judges, while
delineating about the adequacy of sentence, have expressed
thus: -
                                                                     E
       "19. Punishment is the sanction imposed on the offender
       for the infringement of law committed by him. Once a
       person is tried for commission of an offence and found
       guilty by a competent court, it is the duty of the court to
       impose on him such sentence as is prescribed by law. The
                                                                     F
       award of sentence is consequential on and incidental to
       conviction. The law does not envisage a person being
       convicted for an offence without a sentence being imposed
       therefore.

       20. The object of punishment has been succinctly stated       G
       in Halsbury's Laws of England, (4th Edition: Vol.II: para
       482) thus:

2.    (2006) 2 sec 359.
3.    AIR 2008 SC 582.                                               H
    962     SUPREME COURT REPORTS                  [2013] 8 S.C.R.


A              'The aims of punishment are now considered to be
               retribution, justice, deterrence, reformation and
               protection and modern sentencing policy reflects a
               combination of several or all of these aims. The
               retributive element is intended to show public
B              revulsion to the offence and to punish the offender
               for his wrong conduct. The concept of justice as an
               aim of punishment means both that the punishment
               should fit the offence and also that like offences
               should receive similar punishments. An increasingly
c              important aspect of punishment is deterrence and
               sentences are aimed at deterring not only the actual
               offender from further offences but also potential
               offenders from breaking the law. The importance of
               reformation of the offender is shown by the growing
               emphasis laid upon it by much modern legislation,
D
               but judicial opinion towards this particular aim is
               varied and rehabilitation will not usually be
               accorded precedence over deterrence. The main
               aim of punishment in judicial thought. however. is
               still the protection of society and the other objects
E              frequently receive only secondary consideration
               when sentences are being decided".

                                             (emphasis supplied)"

F      15. In Gopa/ Singh v. State of Uttarakhand4, while dealing
  with the philosophy of just punishment which is the collective
  cry of the society, a two-Judge Bench has stated that just
  punishment would be dependent on the facts of the case and
  rationalised judicial discretion. Neither the personal perception
G of a Judge nor self-adhered moralistic vision nor hypothetical
  apprehensions should be allowed to have any play. For every
  offence, a drastic measure cannot be thought of. Similarly, an
  offender cannot be allowed to be treated with leniency solely ·
  on the ground of discretion vested in a Court. The real requisite
H 4. 2013 (2) SCALE 533
 SHYAM NARAIN v>THE STATE OF NCT OF DELHI                    963
             [DIPAK MISRA, J.]

is to weigh the circumstances in which the crime has been           A
committed and other concomitant factors.

     16. The aforesaid authorities deal with sentencing in
general. As is seen, various concepts, namely, gravity of the
offence, manner of its execution, impact on the society, 8
repercussions on the victim and proportionality of punishment
have been emphasized upon. In the case at hand, we are
concerned with the justification of life imprisonment in a case
of rape committed on an eight year old girl, helpless and
vulnerable and, in a way, hapless. The victim was both physically C
and psychologically vulnerable. It is worthy to note that any kind
of sexual assault has always been viewed with seriousness and
sensitivity by this Court.

     17. In Madan Gopal Kakkad v. Naval Dubey and
another°, it has been observed as follows:-                         D

     "... though all sexual assaults on female children are not
     reported and do not come to light yet there is an alarming
     and shocking increase of sexual offences committed on
     children. This is due to the reasons that children are         E
     ignorant of the act of rape and are not able to offer
     resistance and become easy prey for lusty brutes who
     display the unscrupulous, deceitful and insidious art of
     luring female children and young girls. Therefore, such
     offenders who are menace to the civilized society should       F
     be mercilessly and inexorably punished in the severest
     terms."

     18. In State of Andhra Pradesh v. Bodem Sundra Rao6,
this Court noticed that crimes against women are on the rise
and such crimes are affront to the human dignity of the society G
and, therefore, imposition of inadequate sentence is injustice
to the victim of the crime in particular and the society in general.
After so observing, the learned Judges had to say this: -
5. (1992) 3 sec 204.
6. AIR 1996 SC 530.                                                  H
    964       SUPREME COURT REPORTS                   [2013] 8 S.C.R.


A         "The Courts have an obligation while awarding punishment
          to impose appropriate punishment so as to respond to the
          society's crime for justice against such criminals. Public
          abhorrence of the crime needs a reflection through the
          Court's verdict in the measure of punishment. The Courts
B         must not only keep in view the rights of the criminal but also
          the rights of the victim of crime and the society at large
          while considering imposition of the appropriate
          punishment."

          19. In State of Punjab v. Gurmit Singh and others7, this
C   Court stated with anguish that crime against women in general
    and rape in particular is on the increase. The learned Judges
    proceeded further to state that it is an irony that while we are
    celebrating women's rights in all spheres, we show little or no
    concern for her honour. It is a sad reflection of the attitude of
D   indifference of the society towards the violation of human dignity
    of the victims of sex crimes. Thereafter, the Court observed the
    effect of rape on a victim with anguish: -

          "We must remember that a rapist not only violates the
E         victim's privacy and personal integrity, but inevitably
          causes serious psychological as well as physical harm in
          the process. Rape is not merely a physical assault - it is
          often destructive of the whole personality of the victim. A
          murderer destroys the physical body of his victim, a rapist
          degrades the very soul of the helpless female."
F
         20. In State of Kamataka v. Krishnappa 8 , a three-Judge
    Bench opined that the courts must hear the loud cry for justice
    by the society in cases of the heinous crime of rape on innocent
    helpless girls of tender years and respond by imposition of
G   proper sentence. Public abhorrence of the crime needs
    reflection through imposition of appropriate sentence by the
    court. It was further observed that to show mercy in the case of

    7.   AIR 1996 SC 1393.
H s.     (2000) 4 sec 75.
     SHYAM NARAIN v. THE STATE OF NCT OF DELHI                  965
                 [DIPAK MISRA, J.]

such a heinous crime would be travesty of justice and the plea          A
for leniency is wholly misplaced.

    21. In Jugendra Singh v. State of Uttar Pradesh 9, while
dwelling upon the gravity of the crime of rape, this Court had
expressed thus: -
                                                                        B
       "Rape or an attempt to rape is a crime not against an
       individual but a crime which destroys the basic equilibrium
       of the social atmosphere. The consequential death is more
       horrendous. It is to be kept in mind that an offence against
       the body of a woman lowers her dignity and mars her              C
       reputation. It is said that one's physical frame is his or her
       temple. No one has any right of encroachment. An attempt
       for the momentary pleasure of the accused has caused the
       death of a child and had a devastating effect on her family
       and, in the ultimate eventuate, on the collective at large.      D
       When a family suffers in such a manner, the society as a
       whole is compelled to suffer as it creates an incurable dent
       in the fabric of the social milieu."

     22. Keeping in view the aforesaid enunciation of law, the
                                                                        E
obtaining factual matrix, the brutality reflected in the
commission of crime, the response expected from the courts
by the society and the rampant uninhibited exposure of the
bestial nature of pervert minds, we are required to address
whether the rigorous punishment for life imposed on the
appellant is excessive or deserves to be modified. The learned          F
counsel for the appellant would submit that the appellant has
four children and if the sentence is maintained, not only his life
but also the life of his children would be ruined. The other
ground that is urged is the background of impecuniousity. In
essence, leniency is sought on the base of aforesaid mitigating         G
factors. It is seemly to note that the legislature, while prescribing
a minimum sentence for a term which shall not be less than ten
years, has also provided that the sentence may be extended

9.    c2012i s sec 297.                                                 H
    966      SUPREME COURT REPORTS                   [2013] 8 S.C.R.


A   upto life. The legislature, in its wisdom, has left it to the
    discretion of the Court. Almost for the last three decades, this
    Court has been expressing its agony and distress pertaining
    to the increased rate of crimes against women. The eight year
    old girl, who was supposed to spend time in cheerfulness, was
B   dealt with animal passion and her dignity and purity of physical
    frame was shattered. The plight of the child and the shock
    suffered by her can be well visualised. The torment on the child
    has the potentiality to corrode the poise and equanimity of any
    civilized society. The age old wise saying "child is a gift of the
c   providence" enters into the realm of absurdity. The young girl,
    with efflux of time, would grow with traumatic experience, an
    unforgettable shame. She shall always be haunted by the
    memory replete with heavy crush of disaster constantly echoing
    the chill air of the past forcing her to a state of nightmarish
    melancholia. She may not be able to assert the honour of a
D   woman for no fault of hers. Respect for reputation of women in
    the society shows the basic civility of a civilised society. No
    member of society can afford to conceive the idea that he can
    create a hollow in the honour of a woman. Such thinking is not
    only !amen.table but also deplorable. It would not be an
E   exaggeration to say that the thought of sullying the physical
    frame of a woman is the demolition of the accepted civilized
    norm, i.e., "physical morality". In such a sphere, impetuosity has
    no room. The youthful excitement has no place. It should be
    paramount in everyone's mind that, on one hand, the society
F   as a whole cannot preach from the pulpit about social,
    economic and political equality of the sexes and, on the other,
    some pervert members of the same society dehumanize the
    woman by attacking her body and ruining her chastity. It is an
    assault on the individuality and inherent dignity of a woman with
G   the mindset that she should be elegantly servile to men. Rape
    is a monstrous burial of her dignity in the darkness. It is a crime
    against the holy body of a woman and the soul of the society
    and such a crime is aggravated by the manner in which it has
    been committed. We have emphasised on the manner
H   because, in the present case, the victim is an eight year old
  SHYAM NARAIN v. THE STATE OF NCT OF DELHI                     967
              [DIPAK MISRA, J.]

girl who possibly would be deprived of the dreams of "Spring            A
of Life" and might be psychologically compelled to remain in
the 'Torment of Winter". When she suffers, the collective at large
also suffers. Such a singular crime creates an atmosphere of
fear which is historically abhorred by the society. It demands
just punishment from the court and to such a demand, the courts         B
of law are bound to respond within legal parameters. It is a
demand for justice and the award of punishment has to be in
consonance with the legislative command and the discretion
vested ·in the court. The mitigating factors put forth by the learned
counsel for the appellant are meant to invite mercy but we are          c
disposed to think that the factual matrix cannot allow the rainbow
of mercy to magistrate. Our judicial discretion impels us to
maintain the sentence of rigorous imprisonment for life and,
hence, we sustain the judgment of conviction and the order of
sentence passed by the High Court.                                      0
    23. Ex consequenti, the appeal, being sans merit, stands
dismissed.

K.K.T.                                         Appeal dismissed.