New Delhi, Jan 7 (PTI): The Delhi High Court has reduced the sentence of a 65-year-old man from 10 years to five years of rigorous imprisonment in a case relating to the sexual assault of his minor granddaughter in 2015. The court, however, upheld the conviction, observing that the offence was clearly established on the basis of evidence on record, but found merit in partially modifying the sentence after considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case.
Justice Manoj Kumar Ohri, while pronouncing the judgment, noted that the allegations against the convict were grave and disturbing, particularly because the offence involved a breach of trust within the family. The court observed that sexual offences against children, especially by close relatives, leave deep psychological scars and cannot be taken lightly. At the same time, it said sentencing must also take into account mitigating factors where appropriate, without undermining the seriousness of the crime.
The case pertained to an incident reported in 2015, when the victim, a minor girl, accused her grandfather of repeatedly sexually assaulting her at their residence. Following the complaint, an FIR was registered and the man was charged under relevant provisions of the Indian Penal Code and the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act. A trial court had later convicted him and awarded a sentence of 10 years’ rigorous imprisonment.
Challenging the trial court’s order, the convict approached the Delhi High Court, seeking reduction of sentence on various grounds. The defence argued that the man was a senior citizen, suffered from age-related ailments, and had already undergone a substantial portion of the sentence. It was also submitted that there were no previous criminal antecedents and that the incident was several years old.
The prosecution, however, opposed any leniency, contending that the gravity of the offence and the vulnerability of the victim warranted strict punishment. It argued that crimes of sexual abuse against minors demand a strong deterrent message, especially when committed by a family member who is expected to protect the child.
After examining the evidence, Justice Ohri held that the testimony of the victim was consistent and trustworthy, and there was no reason to doubt her version of events. The court observed that minor discrepancies in statements are natural and do not dilute the core allegations. It reaffirmed that the conviction recorded by the trial court was well-founded and did not call for interference.
On the question of sentence, the High Court noted that while punishment must reflect society’s condemnation of such crimes, courts are also required to apply judicial discretion based on individual circumstances. The judge took into account the age of the convict, the period of incarceration already undergone, and the fact that the incident occurred nearly a decade ago. Considering these factors, the court held that a reduced sentence of five years’ rigorous imprisonment would meet the ends of justice.
The court clarified that the reduction in sentence should not be seen as diminishing the seriousness of the offence. It reiterated that sexual crimes against children are among the most heinous offences and deserve strict action. The judgment emphasized that the trauma suffered by child victims often has long-lasting emotional and psychological consequences, which courts must remain sensitive to while dealing with such cases.
The High Court also directed that the compensation awarded to the victim by the trial court would remain unchanged. It stressed the importance of victim compensation as a means of acknowledging harm and aiding rehabilitation, though it cannot undo the suffering caused by such acts.
In its observations, the court underlined the need for families and society to remain vigilant and responsive to signs of abuse, particularly within the home, where children are most vulnerable. It noted that fear, stigma, and emotional dependence often prevent minors from reporting abuse at an early stage.
With the sentence modified, the appeal was partly allowed to the extent of reduction in punishment, while the conviction and other directions of the trial court were upheld. The court concluded by reiterating that justice in cases of child sexual abuse requires a careful balance between deterrence, proportionality of punishment, and consideration of relevant mitigating factors, without compromising the dignity and rights of the victim.