Asharfi v. State of Uttar Pradesh: Rape Conviction Upheld, SC/ST Act Life Sentence Set Aside

Overview of the Supreme Court decision

In Asharfi v. State of Uttar Pradesh, Criminal Appeal No. 1182 of 2015, the Supreme Court maintained the appellant's conviction and ten-year imprisonment for rape under Section 376(2)(g) of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC), as applicable to the offence. However, it set aside his conviction and life sentence under Section 3(2)(v) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (SC/ST Act), because the prosecution had not established the caste-based ground required by the provision in force at the time of the incident.

Important distinction: The ruling applied the wording of Section 3(2)(v) governing the 1995 offence. Parliament subsequently amended that provision with effect from 26 January 2016. The older requirement must not be confused with the amended knowledge-based requirement.

Facts and prosecution case

The prosecution alleged that during the night of 8-9 December 1995, Asharfi and another accused, Udai Bhan, forcibly entered a house occupied by the woman complainant and Brij Lal. The accused allegedly sexually assaulted the woman while Brij Lal was restrained at gunpoint. Neighbours arrived after an alarm was raised, following which the accused fled and allegedly threatened witnesses.

Following Brij Lal's complaint, the police registered Case Crime No. 76 of 1996 under IPC Sections 376, 452, 323 and 506 and provisions of the SC/ST Act. A charge sheet followed investigation.

Trial court and High Court proceedings

By judgment dated 30 November 2007, the trial court convicted Asharfi under IPC Sections 450, 376(2)(g) and 323, and Section 3(2)(v) of the SC/ST Act. For the rape offence it imposed ten years' rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 8,000, with a default clause. For the SC/ST Act offence it imposed life imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 10,000, with a default clause. Separate sentences were also imposed for other IPC offences.

The High Court affirmed the convictions. Asharfi challenged that decision before the Supreme Court, where an amicus curiae represented his case.

Supreme Court findings

Rape conviction and sentence sustained

The Supreme Court considered the testimony of PW-3 Phoola Devi and PW-4 Brij Lal, together with medical evidence. Finding no reason to disturb the concurrent conclusions of the courts below, it upheld the conviction under IPC Section 376(2)(g), the ten-year sentence and the other IPC convictions and sentences.

Conviction under Section 3(2)(v) of the SC/ST Act set aside

Under the version of Section 3(2)(v) applicable to the 1995 incident, the prosecution needed to establish that the relevant offence had been committed on the ground that the victim belonged to a Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe. The Court found no evidence establishing that necessary connection in this case. Consequently, the separate conviction under Section 3(2)(v), and the life sentence attached to it, could not stand.

Final order

The appeal was partly allowed. The Supreme Court set aside the conviction and life sentence under the SC/ST Act while confirming the conviction and ten-year imprisonment for rape and the other IPC offences. Since the appellant had already served more than ten years, the Court directed his release unless required in another case.

Relevant legal provisions and present-day position

IPC Section 376(2)(g): provision applied in the 2017 judgment

The then-applicable Section 376(2)(g) addressed gang rape. It governed the alleged 1995 offence and the conviction reviewed in this appeal. Subsequent amendments to rape law and the enactment of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS), do not retrospectively replace the legal basis of this conviction.

SC/ST Act Section 3(2)(v): before and after the 2016 amendment

Before 26 January 2016: the provision required proof that the specified serious IPC offence was committed against a person or property on the ground that the person belonged to a Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe, or the property belonged to such a person. This was the version considered in Asharfi.

From 26 January 2016: the amendment substituted a requirement that the accused committed the qualifying offence knowing that the person was a member of a Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe, or that the property belonged to such a member. Accordingly, the decision in Asharfi should not be cited as imposing the former caste-motive test on offences governed by the amended text. The remaining statutory elements must still be proved.

Current BNS provisions

The BNS came into force on 1 July 2024. Section 63 defines rape, Section 64 prescribes punishment for rape, and Section 70 concerns gang rape, including group participation or action in furtherance of common intention. These are current provisions for conduct to which the BNS applies; they do not alter the historical IPC conviction in this case. For a current prosecution, the applicable SC/ST Act provision and its amendments must also be examined separately.

Official references: Supreme Court judgment (PDF); India Code - central legislation; NCRB - Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita provisions.

Legal significance of the judgment

The decision illustrates that proof of the underlying offence and proof of the additional statutory ingredients of an aggravated offence are distinct questions. A court may sustain a rape conviction while setting aside an additional SC/ST Act conviction if the separate elements of the latter have not been established under the law applicable to the offence.

Because Section 3(2)(v) changed in 2016, the correct statutory version and the date of the alleged offence are essential when applying this precedent.

Read the Supreme Court judgment dated 8 December 2017

Open or download the judgment PDF hosted on this website | Official Supreme Court PDF