Supreme Court upholds death sentence, rejects intoxication defence in child rape case

ISLAMABAD: The Supreme Court of Pakistan has upheld the death sentence of a man convicted of raping and murdering a five-year-old girl. The court ruled that voluntary intoxication does not reduce criminal responsibility.

Justice Muhammad Hashim Khan Kakar authored the three-page judgment. According to the ruling, individuals remain accountable for crimes committed after voluntarily consuming intoxicants.

“Intoxication caused by one’s own negligence or recklessness does not excuse the offence,” the judgment stated.

Supreme Court hears appeal

A three-member bench heard the appeal filed by Sunni Masih. Justice Kakar led the bench, while Justice Salahuddin Panhwar and Justice Ishtiaq Ibrahim also served on it.

Masih challenged a February 28, 2018 ruling of the Balochistan High Court. Previously, the high court had upheld his death sentence for the rape and murder of five-year-old Angel Kumari in Sibi.

Police arrested Masih after the crime in January 2014. Subsequently, prosecutors charged him under Sections 302(b), 364-A and 376 of the Pakistan Penal Code. A trial court later convicted him and awarded the death penalty.

Defence seeks sentence reduction

Before the Supreme Court, Masih’s lawyer did not challenge the conviction. Instead, he requested a reduction of the death sentence to life imprisonment.

The defence argued that Masih committed the crime while intoxicated. In support of that claim, the lawyer referred to a judicial confession made by the accused.

However, the court rejected the argument. The judges ruled that voluntary intoxication cannot serve as a defence in criminal cases.

“A man who gets drunk voluntarily has no right to claim exemption from criminal liability,” Justice Kakar observed.

Court finds evidence sufficient

The bench reviewed the evidence and noted the brutal nature of the crime. Furthermore, it found that the prosecution had proved the charges beyond reasonable doubt.

The judges agreed with the findings of both lower courts. Moreover, they found no legal error in the earlier decisions.

As a result, the Supreme Court unanimously dismissed the appeal. It concluded that the high court judgment was legally sound and required no intervention.