In 2013, a father named Eknath Kisan Kumbharkar from Nashik, Maharashtra, took a drastic step. He murdered his pregnant daughter, Pramila, for marrying outside her caste. His actions were fueled by the belief that his family’s honor was tarnished. Unfortunately, inter-caste marriages still spark violence in certain parts of India, despite years of progressive legal reforms.
Supreme Court Reconsiders Death Penalty
On October 16, 2024, the Supreme Court of India revisited this tragic case. The bench, consisting of Justices B R Gavai, Aravind Kumar, and K V Viswanathan, reduced Kumbharkar’s death sentence to 20 years of rigorous imprisonment. While the court upheld the father’s conviction, they emphasized the need for a sentence that allowed for possible reform rather than execution.
Historical View on Caste-Based Violence
Although India’s Constitution abolished untouchability in 1950, caste-based violence remains a harsh reality. Sadly, many families still oppose inter-caste marriages, believing they bring dishonor. This case serves as a reminder of how caste prejudices continue to shape people’s decisions, leading to irreversible actions and broken families.
Factors Leading to Sentence Reduction
The court considered several mitigating factors in reducing the sentence. Kumbharkar, aged 38 at the time of the crime, had no prior criminal history. He came from a poor nomadic background and grew up with an alcoholic father, facing severe neglect. Additionally, his health had deteriorated, having undergone an angioplasty and suffering from other serious ailments.
The Court’s Emphasis on Reformation
The Supreme Court’s decision reflected the belief that not all criminals are beyond reformation. The judges emphasized that the death penalty should be reserved for the “rarest of rare” cases. In Kumbharkar’s situation, his conduct in prison was reported as satisfactory, and his behavior did not indicate that he was beyond redemption.
Not the Rarest of Rare Case
The court’s decision to reduce the sentence was grounded in the idea that this case did not meet the stringent criteria for the death penalty. They determined that, while the crime was heinous, there remained the possibility for Kumbharkar to reform. His lack of prior criminal activity and relatively good behavior in prison were deciding factors.
Indian Legal System’s Approach to the Death Penalty
Historically, the death penalty in India has been imposed sparingly, reserved for the most extreme cases. Courts are often guided by the principle of mercy when there is hope for rehabilitation. In this case, the Supreme Court echoed the sentiments that justice should also consider the possibility of a second chance, especially when the accused has a chance of reform.