72-year-old Delhi man sentenced to 20 years rigorous imprisonment for rape of minor

A court here has sentenced a 72-year-old man to 20 years of rigorous imprisonment for raping a minor last year, saying that despite the victim addressing him as grandfather, he preyed upon her to quench his lust.

Underlining the betrayal of trust and erosion of societal values, Additional Sessions Judge Babita Puniya said that the crime shattered the societal notion that elders protected children.

Judge Puniya was hearing arguments on sentencing against the man who had been convicted under the penal provision for rape and Section 6 (aggravated penetrative sexual assault) of the POCSO Act. In its order dated March 24, the court said the victim was merely eight years old and so the foremost aggravating factor in the case was the comparative age of the convict and the victim.

“The victim used to call him ‘dada’ but he preyed upon her to quench his covetousness and selfish needs – his lust,” the court said.

“The assault, in the considered opinion of this court, is not only on the child but it also profanes the very reverence our society holds for elders, eroding the foundation upon which families and communities rest. This also shatters our notion that elders protect children,” it said. It trashed the defence argument seeking a lenient sentence on the grounds that it was “not a case of penile-vaginal rape but of oral rape”.

“The legislature has made no distinction whatsoever between penile-vaginal, penile-oral, penile-anal, digital or any other form of penetration. Oral rape (fellatio/oral penetration) squarely falls within the definition of penetrative sexual assault,” the court said. It then sentenced him to 20 years of rigorous imprisonment for committing the offence under Section 6 (punishment for aggravated penetrative sexual assault) of the POCSO Act.

Beyond the 20-year prison term, the court highlighted the necessity of victim compensation.

It said, “True, the compensation cannot heal the trauma or pain suffered by a child victim, nor can it erase the violation of innocence, restore lost childhood or fully heal the deep emotional wounds inflicted by the perpetrator’s actions.”

Nevertheless, the court said, compensation can serve as a partial measure of restorative justice by providing tangible support for rehabilitation and education.

It granted Rs 13.5 lakh compensation to the victim.

“In addition, the District Child Protection Unit (DCPU) shall arrange trauma-informed counselling/ psychological evaluation for the child/ victim by a qualified child psychologist,” the court said, adding that the counselling would address the child’s feeling of pressure, confusion, alienation and discomfort.