A division bench of the Karnataka High Court on Thursday confirmed the death sentence for serial rapist and murderer Umesh Reddy but gave a split verdict on awarding the death penalty, on Thursday.

The bench comprising Justice VG Sabhahit and Justice RB Naik upheld Umesh’s conviction in the case of rape-robbery-murder of a city woman during 1998. It also upheld the sentences of seven years and ten years rigorous imrisonment for rape and robbery.

In his judgement,Justice Sabhahit observed: “offence committed by the convict is not only savage and brutal, but also inhuman and barbarous. His antecedents and conduct point out that he would be a menace to society...... Offence is of a nature and magniture that cannot fail to excite the trits and horror of any ordinary person ..... and arouses a sense of revulsion in the mind of a common man.” Justice Sabhahit held the case to be under the category of rarest of rare cases, attracting capital penalty.

“Considering the enormity of the crime, its execution, the convict’s conduct, vulnerability of the victim, convict’s previous escapes from custody, society’s expectation, and other relevant circumstances, sentence of life imprisonment is inadequate. Interest of justice would be met only by awarding death penalty” - Justice VG Sabhahit opined.

Rarest of rare
However, Justice RB Naik, in his dissenting judgement, observed that the conviction was based on circumstantial evidence and thet death sentence was not the only option.  “Though the case comes under the category of rarest of rare cases, imposition of death sentence is not called for. The convict shall undergo a sentence of rigorous imprisonment for life, until his natural death and shall not be entitled for any remission or amnesty granted by Governments on special occasions. ” - Justice RB Naik opined.

Justice RB Naik opined :  “It cannot be presumed that imposition of death sentence in a case would deter similar crimes, in absence of relevant data. Sentencing a criminal to imprisonment for life till his last breath would be like keeping a specimen in a museum which will send continuous signals to society... Death sentence would also relieve criminals of their misdeeds, pain and suffering..... Life sentence would also answer human rights activists’ slogan that what we can give can’t be taken away. Object of saving society from anti-socials can be achieved by isolating him in prison for remaining life.” In view of the split decision, the Bench ordered the case be placed before the Chief Justice for placing the matter before a third judge.