The Supreme Court has stressed on adopting a rehabilitative and reformative approach towards women committing crimes under social circumstances, such as marriage against their will.
The Bench of Justice MM Sundresh and Justice Aravind Kumar passed the order on a petition challenging a Karnataka High Court verdict that upheld the conviction of the appellants under Section 302 IPC read with Section 120 B IPC and a life sentence imposed upon them.
The matter pertained to the murder committed by a young college-going woman, Shubha, of her fiancé (deceased) with the help of her close friend Arun Verma, along with two others, Venkatesh and Dinesh alias Dinakaran.
The Apex Court observed that Shubha’s motive for conspiring to kill the deceased was because she was being forced into marriage by her parents against her will and confided this in her close friend Arun.
A modern-day woman, desirous of spreading her ambitious wings and wanting to exercise her right of choice and freedom, was unjustly constrained by various factors, such as social inequalities, deep-seated gendered roles and pressing situations.
It said external elements contributed substantially to the inequalities in the life of a young lady, pushing her into a dark corner. Factors such as lack of education, social stigma, inadequate financial support, and perceived notions about the value system, might trigger a variety of responses.
These factors did not merely limit her choices, but distort her very perception of freedom, making resistance seem impossible or even immoral. In some cases, she may internalise these pressures, believing that compliance was her only option.
In others, she may resist in subtle, often invisible ways—through quiet despair, emotional withdrawal, or even clandestine acts of defiance, added the Bench.
Speaking on the current matter, the Apex Court said a forced marriage, divorcing the young woman from her professional ambitions and curtailing her further education, would certainly warrant a reaction.
An unwarranted marriage was the worst form of alienation that a woman could experience both mentally and physically.
Situations such as these closed all doors of hope for a woman, leaving her with few options – either suffer in silence or take extremely defiant steps, such as leave her parental home without notice, turn violent, or even commit suicide.
The top court of the country noted that in cases where a criminal was born out of his/her impending circumstances, punishment would not be able to cure the root cause for such conduct.
In order to prevent future crimes, it was important to consider the psychosocial and emotional enablers that led to the commission of the crime, it observed.
When a criminal was born out of the social injustices around or towards him/her, it was crucial to see him/her as a victim who required curing through social and systemic support, along with compassionate correction.
As per the Court, society, through its own systemic failures, inequalities, or neglect often played a role in shaping criminal behaviour, and was also responsible for the creation of such behaviour, whether through poverty, lack of education, discrimination, or broken institutions.
In such a scenario, the offender became a victim, requiring adequate measures for treatment by compassionate correction, structural support, and opportunities for genuine transformation.
The top court of the country said it was the responsibility of every other individual to bring the individual back into the social fold, ultimately rebuilding the bonds of community rather than perpetuating cycles of alienation and punishment.
In the same view, it granted liberty to the appellants to seek pardon from the Karnataka Governor, considering that the crime was committed by the accused out of frustration of being forced to marry against her will.
Noting that her crime could not be condoned, since it resulted in the loss of an innocent life of a young man, the Apex Court said the woman was made to commit this offence by adopting the wrong course of action in order to address her problem. Years have rolled on since the occurrence of the crime, which was in 2003, it added.
The Bench directed the appellants to file appropriate petitions seeking to invoke the power of pardon under Article 161 of the Constitution within eight weeks from the date of the judgment.
The Apex Court further suspended their sentences till their pardon petitions were considered by the Governor.
The post Supreme Court for rehabilitation of women committing crimes under social circumstances appeared first on India Legal.