The Orissa High Court has set aside the death penalty given to a man for the rape and murder of a five-year-old girl, finding that the trial was carried out in a mechanical and unfair manner. The Court has ordered a fresh trial, highlighting serious violations of the accused’s right to a fair trial.
While delivering the judgment, the Division Bench of Justice Bibhu Prasad Routray and Justice Chittaranjan Dash emphasized,
“The right to a fair trial is not a privilege of the accused but a fundamental right for society at large, to ensure justice is both done and seen to be done.”
Case Background
On the night of October 21, 2016, a widow and her young daughter were sleeping at home when someone abducted the child. Despite efforts by the mother and neighbors, the child could not be found immediately. Later, her body was discovered at an under-construction house. Identity documents belonging to the accused, Sanjeeb Kerketta, were recovered from the spot. He was arrested soon after, and forensic tests confirmed injuries leading to neuro-hemorrhagic shock.
Read Also:- Orissa High Court Puts Hold on NHRC Proceedings Against KIIT University in Case of Nepali Student’s Death
Following an investigation, a charge sheet was filed against the accused under Sections 302, 376-A, 376(2)(i), 366, 450, and 201 of IPC and Section 6 of the POCSO Act. The trial resulted in a death sentence.
Major Irregularities Found
The Court found that the accused was not provided proper legal aid. Though legal aid lawyers were appointed, they withdrew frequently, leaving the accused without effective representation. On multiple crucial dates, the lawyers either did not appear or cross-examined witnesses in a casual manner. No defense evidence was produced, and the accused had little chance to defend himself properly.
“The absence of counsel on significant dates, mechanical cross-examination, and lack of proactive defense strategy prejudiced the convict’s case,” the Court noted.
Moreover, the trial Court failed to ensure that appointed lawyers were given full case papers. This lack of preparation time seriously affected the quality of defense, violating the accused’s rights under Article 21 of the Constitution.
Faulty Section 313 CrPC Examination
When questioned under Section 313 CrPC, the accused was asked lengthy, confusing questions that grouped several facts together. The High Court observed,
“The opportunity provided under Section 313 CrPC is not a mere formality but a substantive and valuable right. Any omission to properly and fairly examine the accused constitutes a material irregularity vitiating the proceedings.”
Same-Day Sentencing Without Considering Mitigating Factors
The Court criticized the trial Court for awarding the death penalty on the same day of conviction without a proper hearing on mitigating circumstances. Citing precedents like Santa Singh v. State of Punjab and Sovaran Singh Prajapati v. State of Uttar Pradesh, the Bench said,
“The sentencing Court must meaningfully weigh aggravating and mitigating circumstances before imposing the death penalty.”
Considering all these serious lapses, the Orissa High Court canceled the conviction and sentence, ordering a fresh trial from the stage of framing charges. The trial Court has been instructed to ensure proper legal aid and fair proceedings, aiming to conclude the case within six months.
Case Title: State of Odisha v. Sanjeeb Kerketta
Case No: DSREF No. 02 of 2023 & JCRLA No. 142 of 2023
Date of Judgment: April 23, 2025
Counsel for the State: Mr. P.S. Nayak, Addl. Govt. Advocate
Counsel for the Condemned Prisoner: Mr. P. Mohanty, Advocate
