The Punjab and Haryana High Court has commuted the death sentence of a woman convicted of murdering a two-year-old girl to 30 years of rigorous imprisonment, ruling that the convict was not beyond reform and that her own children should not be permanently deprived of their mother.
A division bench comprising Justice Vinod S. Bhardwaj and Justice Ravinder Malik upheld the conviction of the woman, identified as Neelam, while setting aside the capital punishment awarded by a trial court earlier this year. Alongside the 30-year term without remission, the court imposed a fine of Rs 50,000 on the appellant.
Balancing Retribution and Rehabilitation
Delivering the judgment on September 23, the bench observed that while the crime was gruesome, capital punishment was not the sole appropriate recourse. The judges noted that the convict is a mother of young children and had demonstrated no record of disorderly or disruptive conduct that would indicate she was an irremediable threat to society.
The bench remarked that while the victim’s mother had endured the loss of her child, justice should not leave the convict’s children without their mother beyond any point of return. The court underscored that a healthy society is built on extending hope rather than inflicting reciprocal deprivation on innocent dependents.
Addressing the purpose of penal sanctions, the bench observed that a custodial term permitting daily introspection and remorse offers a genuine path toward restitution, whereas execution merely terminates the opportunity for a convict to make amends. Jail records showed that the woman had maintained cordial ties with fellow prisoners and had not faced any disciplinary infractions during her incarceration.
Origins of the Dispute
The case originates from an incident on November 28, 2021, when a two-year-old girl went missing outside her residence. According to the victim’s grandfather, his wife had been supervising the child as she played in the street before stepping inside their house for approximately five minutes to fetch water. Upon her return, the toddler had disappeared.
A search by family members led to suspicions against Neelam, a neighbour who had allegedly harboured a grudge against the household. The victim’s father, a Punjab Police personnel, had previously prohibited his wife from associating with Neelam due to neighbourhood perceptions regarding her conduct.
The breakthrough in the investigation occurred when a local resident alerted authorities that Neelam had admitted to burying the child. Police subsequently detained her.
Confession and Underlying Motives
During police interrogation, Neelam admitted to abducting the toddler on a two-wheeler, transporting her to a vacant plot, and burying her alive in a pit. She maintained that she acted alone.
She explained her actions as the outcome of simmering resentment and financial distress. While the victim’s grandfather worked in a factory and her father served in the police department, enabling them to purchase items for their children, Neelam’s family lived in acute poverty. Neelam stated that her inability to satisfy similar demands made by her own children fueled her hostility toward the neighbouring household.
Trial Proceedings and Legal Arguments
A trial court convicted Neelam on April 12, 2024, and sentenced her to death on April 18, 2024. She subsequently challenged the verdict before the High Court.
During the appellate hearings, Senior Advocate A. D. S. Sukhija, appearing for Neelam, acknowledged the motive stemmed from a personal grudge but argued that the appellant suffered from no psychiatric conditions, psychotic disorders, or violent behavioral traits that would render her permanently dangerous. The defense highlighted her socio-economic marginalization and extreme poverty, arguing that the economic distress and pressure from her children’s unmet demands constituted substantial mitigating circumstances.
Opposing the appeal, counsel for the complainant Atul Goyal argued that the extreme nature of the crime warranted no leniency. He submitted that burying an innocent two-year-old child alive in sand reflected profound cruelty and an utter absence of human sympathy.
While the High Court agreed that the prosecution had established an unbroken chain of circumstantial evidence proving Neelam’s guilt beyond reasonable doubt, it concluded that the mitigating factors warranted commuting the death penalty to a term of 30 years’ rigorous imprisonment.
