Social influence of the crime in opposition to girls requires “exemplary therapy” to be meted out to the accused, mentioned the Bombay excessive court docket (HC) on Friday whereas refusing to scale back the life time period to six-year imprisonment to a Mumbaikar for making an attempt to kill his girlfriend six years in the past, who had additionally refused to marry him, regardless of being in an intimate relationship for 2 years.
“We’re aware that the social influence of the crime in opposition to girls can’t be overlooked and per se require exemplary therapy,” mentioned the two-member HC bench, comprising Justices SS Shinde and MS Karnik, whereas rejecting the prayer of the convict, Arumugum Arundatiyar, to scale back his life time period to 6 years imprisonment, which he had already served.
Earlier, Mumbai classes court docket had sentenced Arundatiyar to a life time period.
The prosecution argued that Arundatiyar was seeing the younger girl, who labored as a baby-sitter, and needed to marry her.
She, nonetheless, had refused to marry him, as her household was against the match, following which Arundatiyar had assaulted her twice as a result of she had spurned his proposal.
On Might 8, 2014, when the sufferer was returning house from work by an auto-rickshaw, Arundatiyar barged into the car.
He threatened the auto-driver with a knife and pulled her out of the car. Arundatiyar attacked her with the knife in public. He stabbed her on the neck and likewise threatened the general public, who had tried to intervene.
Although he had fled from the scene of the crime, he was arrested after some time.
Arundatiyar appealed in opposition to the classes court docket verdict and transfer HC.
His counsel, advocate Aniket Vagal, pleaded earlier than HC that the accidents induced to the girl weren’t life-threatening and the incident befell as a result of she had refused to marry him, even they have been in an intimate relationship for 2 years.
Vagal additionally cited that Arundatiyar was solely 25 years previous when he had dedicated the crime and had little monetary means.
He argued that the sentence was grossly disproportionate to the crime, particularly when the accidents weren’t life-threatening, and urged the court docket to let Arundatiyar off since he had served six years in jail.
HC, nonetheless, refused to point out any sympathy to the convict.
The bench mentioned any liberal strategy by imposing meagre sentences or taking a lenient view of the crimes in opposition to girls can be counter-productive in the long term and in opposition to societal pursuits.
However, HC discovered life imprisonment to be too harsh and diminished Arundatiyar’s sentence to 10 years, of which he wanted to serve one other 4 years.