<p>The Supreme Court has declined to reconsider its April 19 judgment, which commuted the death penalty awarded to a man for rape and murder of a four-year-old girl to a life term, while saying "every sinner has a future."</p>.<p>A bench of Justices U U Lalit, S Ravindra Bhat and Bela M Trivedi dismissed review petitions filed by the mother of the victim as well as NGO Bhartiya Stree Shakti.</p>.<p>"After considering the landmark decisions of this court in Bachan Singh Vs State of Punjab (1980) and Machi Singh and Others Vs State of Punjab (1983), this court did not deem it appropriate to sustain the sentence of death awarded under Section 302 of the IPC. As the discussionin Paragraph 40 and 41 indicates (of April 19) the legislative policy under Sections 354 (3) and 235 (2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 was noted and the commutation was directed," the bench said.</p>.<p><strong>Also Read | <a href="https://www.deccanherald.com/national/sc-asks-centre-to-seek-fcs-views-on-regulating-freebies-1130265.html" target="_blank">SC asks Centre to seek FC's views on regulating freebies</a></strong></p>.<p>"Even after conclusion of hearing, certain material from the Probation Officer and Director General of Prison, Trained Psychiatrist were also called so that the matter pertaining to sentence to be awarded could be considered. Thus, the commutation of sentence of death to that of life imprisonment was done by the court after bestowing attention to the relevant factors," the bench added. </p>.<p>The court held that no case was made out to take a different view in the matter and this review petition was dismissed.</p>.<p><strong>Also Read | <a href="https://www.deccanherald.com/national/north-and-central/sc-to-hear-plea-against-rajasthan-hc-parole-to-life-convict-for-procreation-1129965.html" target="_blank">SC to hear plea against Rajasthan HC parole to life convict for procreation</a></strong></p>.<p>The review plea filed by the mother of the victim through advocate Alakh Alok Srivastava had contended, “My little daughter, who was deceitfully kidnapped, brutally raped and viciously murdered by Mohd Firoz, also had a future.”</p>.<p>The plea had also claimed the judgment seemed to have overlooked that the sentencing policy must be befitting to the nature of crime and deterrent with an explicit aim to make an example out of the evil-doer and a warning to those who are still innocent. </p>.<p>In the case, the trial court had sentenced the convict to the capital punishment which was confirmed by the Madhya Pradesh High Court. The top court, however, had commuted the sentence, saying "We are reminded of what Oscar Wilde has said - 'The only difference between the saint and the sinner is that every saint has a past and every sinner has a future.'"</p>
<p>The Supreme Court has declined to reconsider its April 19 judgment, which commuted the death penalty awarded to a man for rape and murder of a four-year-old girl to a life term, while saying "every sinner has a future."</p>.<p>A bench of Justices U U Lalit, S Ravindra Bhat and Bela M Trivedi dismissed review petitions filed by the mother of the victim as well as NGO Bhartiya Stree Shakti.</p>.<p>"After considering the landmark decisions of this court in Bachan Singh Vs State of Punjab (1980) and Machi Singh and Others Vs State of Punjab (1983), this court did not deem it appropriate to sustain the sentence of death awarded under Section 302 of the IPC. As the discussionin Paragraph 40 and 41 indicates (of April 19) the legislative policy under Sections 354 (3) and 235 (2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 was noted and the commutation was directed," the bench said.</p>.<p><strong>Also Read | <a href="https://www.deccanherald.com/national/sc-asks-centre-to-seek-fcs-views-on-regulating-freebies-1130265.html" target="_blank">SC asks Centre to seek FC's views on regulating freebies</a></strong></p>.<p>"Even after conclusion of hearing, certain material from the Probation Officer and Director General of Prison, Trained Psychiatrist were also called so that the matter pertaining to sentence to be awarded could be considered. Thus, the commutation of sentence of death to that of life imprisonment was done by the court after bestowing attention to the relevant factors," the bench added. </p>.<p>The court held that no case was made out to take a different view in the matter and this review petition was dismissed.</p>.<p><strong>Also Read | <a href="https://www.deccanherald.com/national/north-and-central/sc-to-hear-plea-against-rajasthan-hc-parole-to-life-convict-for-procreation-1129965.html" target="_blank">SC to hear plea against Rajasthan HC parole to life convict for procreation</a></strong></p>.<p>The review plea filed by the mother of the victim through advocate Alakh Alok Srivastava had contended, “My little daughter, who was deceitfully kidnapped, brutally raped and viciously murdered by Mohd Firoz, also had a future.”</p>.<p>The plea had also claimed the judgment seemed to have overlooked that the sentencing policy must be befitting to the nature of crime and deterrent with an explicit aim to make an example out of the evil-doer and a warning to those who are still innocent. </p>.<p>In the case, the trial court had sentenced the convict to the capital punishment which was confirmed by the Madhya Pradesh High Court. The top court, however, had commuted the sentence, saying "We are reminded of what Oscar Wilde has said - 'The only difference between the saint and the sinner is that every saint has a past and every sinner has a future.'"</p>