Pune- In a verdict that has been hailed as a landmark in fast-track justice, a Special POCSO Court in Pune has sentenced 65-year-old Bhimrao Prabhakar Kamble to death for the rape and murder of a three-and-a-half-year-old girl. The court delivered its final judgment just 59 days after the crime was committed on May 1, marking one of the swiftest conclusions to a child sexual assault case in recent years.

The judgment, delivered by Special Judge S.R. Salunkhe, classified the crime as falling squarely within the "rarest of rare" category, warranting the maximum punishment available under law.

The court convicted Kamble under multiple sections of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023, including Section 103(1) for murder, Section 65(2) for rape of a child below 12 years, and Sections 64, 74, 137(2), 140(1), and 238 for rape, outraging modesty, kidnapping, and causing disappearance of evidence.

Additionally, he was found guilty under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, 2012, under Sections 4, 6, 8, and 12, which correspond to penetrative sexual assault, aggravated penetrative sexual assault, sexual assault, and sexual harassment, respectively.

The Crime That Shook Pune

The incident occurred on May 1,in Nasarapur village, Taluka Bhor, Pune district. The accused, Bhimrao Kamble, a daily wage laborer with a history of misconduct against women, lured the 3-year-old victim away from the premises of the Shriram Temple, where she was playing. He enticed her with the promise of sweets (Gathi Shev) and the prospect of seeing a newborn calf at a nearby cowshed.

Kamble took the child to a tin-sheet shed adjacent to the cowshed, where he committed aggravated penetrative sexual assault and then brutally murdered her. He later concealed her body under an empty gunny bag, intending to dispose of it later. The victim's family and villagers launched a massive search, which eventually led to the discovery of the child's body and the arrest of the accused.

The crime had triggered widespread public outrage across Maharashtra. Thousands of people gathered at Nasrapur, and an impromptu blockade was organized on the Mumbai-Bengaluru National Highway, with protesters demanding justice. 

The public outrage was so intense that people began talking about delivering justice themselves. The Maharashtra government responded by assigning the matter to a special fast-track court. The Superintendent of Police, Pune Rural, immediately formed a Special Investigation Team (SIT) of 7 police officers, with two more subsequently added.

The Evidence That Proved the Crime

The prosecution presented a watertight case, examining 55 witnesses and submitting over 370 documentary exhibits. The key pieces of evidence included:

CCTV Footage and the 'Last Seen Together' theory: The most crucial piece of evidence was the CCTV footage from a nearby sweet shop. It showed the accused and the victim walking together towards the shed at 3:12 PM. At 3:51 PM, the accused was seen returning alone. This 39-minute gap proved fatal for the accused, establishing the 'last seen together' theory.

Medical and Forensic evidence: The post-mortem report revealed 18 injuries on the victim's body, including contusions on the face, chest, and private parts. The doctors concluded that the death was caused by asphyxia due to smothering and gagging. The victim's leggings were found stuffed 21 cm deep into her mouth, which was sufficient to cause death.

DNA Profiling: Forensic reports confirmed that the semen and blood stains found on the victim's clothes and body matched the DNA profile of the accused, leaving no doubt about his involvement in the sexual assault.

Child Witnesses: Three child witnesses identified the accused during a Test Identification (TI) Parade. They testified that the accused had pelted stones at them to drive them away before taking the victim with him.

Sandeep Gayawal, the owner of the cowshed, testified that when he confronted the accused after seeing the CCTV footage, Kamble confessed, saying, "I have committed a mistake and have killed the victim."

The defense argued that the case was based on circumstantial evidence and that the CCTV footage could have been manipulated. The accused, in his statement under Section 351 of BNSS, claimed that he had only lifted the child to show her a calf, slipped, and she fell, causing an injury. He claimed he left her there and walked away.

The court rejected this explanation, observing:

"If the child was crying due to injury, why did no one from the neighborhood come to the shed? The accused's explanation is not only improbable but also fails to account for the sexual assaults and the DNA evidence found on the victim's body."

What Did the Court Say? 

Presiding Judge S.R. Salunkhe delivered a 145-page judgment, making several profound and emotional observations that underline the gravity of the crime and the rationale behind awarding the death penalty. Here are the key quotes from the court:

"The brutality of the crime, the manner in which it was committed, and the inhuman behavior towards a 3-year-old child take the accused away from thinking of any alternative to death sentence. The possibility of awarding life imprisonment, which is the normal rule, is unquestionably foreclosed in this case."

The court also observed that: "The age of the accused (65 years) cannot be taken as a mitigating circumstance, rather it would be an aggravating circumstance. The thirst for lust of the accused is not extinguished even at such age. Rather, it has reached a very dangerous stage."

"When the accused was shown the CCTV footage, he suddenly shifted from denial mode to defensive mode. However, his explanation was found to be highly improbable and not worthy of belief. He failed to discharge the burden under Section 106 of the Evidence Act."

The verdict further reads, "There are absolutely no mitigating circumstances brought on record in this case. The accused has passed the stage of reformation and he will remain a menace to society."

The Judge implied that the "offence was committed outrageously for want only while involving inhumane treatment and torture to the victim. The victim was an innocent child and was helpless. It was a cold-blooded murder without provocation. This crime is committed so brutally that it pricks or shocks not only the judicial conscience but even the conscience of the society."

Why the Death Penalty?

While awarding the death sentence, the court applied the principles laid down in the landmark Supreme Court judgments of Bachan Singh, Machhi Singh, and Shankar Khade. The judge found that this case clearly fell under the "rarest of rare" category.

The court listed the following aggravating circumstances:

The crime was cruel, diabolic, brutal, and depraved. It shocked the judicial conscience and the conscience of society. The conduct of the accused shows he is beyond reformation and is a menace to society.

The victim was a helpless 3-year-old child and the crime was unprovoked and premeditated.

The court also noted the criminal antecedents of the accused. He was previously prosecuted for attempted rape of an old lady in 1998 and for outraging the modesty of a 17-year-old relative in 2015.

Although he was acquitted in those cases due to procedural issues, the court observed that his history indicated a persistent pattern of deviant behavior.