In 1994, a horrific crime rocked Dehradun: A retired Army Colonel, his sister, and his son were brutally murdered in their home. After five years, the family’s gardener, a young man employed by them, was arrested and convicted of the triple homicide. What followed thereafter was not only a quest for justice but also a saga of judicial mistakes and missed opportunities, leading to the convict’s imprisonment for more than twenty years.

On Wednesday, the Supreme Court finally set him free.  

The boy who lost his youth  

In 2001, a court in Uttarakhand sentenced the gardener to death. It was a swift and severe judgement for the murders, but one glaring fact was ignored: The convict was just 14 years old when the crime occurred. Despite his repeated claims of being a minor, backed by school records, the trial court relied on a bank account to estimate his age as 20.  

This error cascaded through the judicial system. The high court upheld his sentence, and the Supreme Court dismissed his appeal in 2002, overlooking his juvenility claim. At every step, the boy, now a young man, was denied the protections guaranteed under the Juvenile Justice (JJ) Act.

A glimmer of hope  

Over the years, the convict clung to hope, filing review petitions and writs. In 2005, during a curative petition, a breakthrough occurred: The Uttarakhand government admitted in an affidavit that his school records were accurate. His birth date was January 4, 1980 – he was 14 at the time of the murders.  

But even this startling revelation was not enough. The curative petition was dismissed in 2006. The only relief he received came from the President of India, who commuted his death sentence to life imprisonment. Still, it came with a cruel condition – he would remain in prison until he turned 60.  

The Supreme Court steps in   

On Wednesday, after more than 23 years of incarceration, the Supreme Court righted this wrong. A bench led by Justice MM Sundresh ruled that the convict should never have been sentenced to death or denied his rights as a minor.  

 “This is a case where the appellant has been suffering due to the error committed by the courts,” the bench said. “The time which he has lost, for no fault of his, can never be restored,” it said.

Justice Sundresh also reminded the court of its responsibility to unearth the truth and apply social welfare laws like the JJ Act. “A child is a product of the present, in need of being moulded, to thrive in the future. One must not lose sight of the fact that the child is not responsible for an act of crime but is rather victimised by it,” he said.

Crime and court’s judgement 

The gardener, employed by the retired Colonel, attacked the family with a knife, killing the Colonel, his 65-year-old sister, and his 27-year-old son. The Colonel’s wife survived.

After the murders, the convict disappeared for five years, evading capture until he was arrested in West Bengal in 1999. The state argued that the severity of his crime justified his punishment, but the Supreme Court disagreed, emphasising the need to view the case through the lens of his age and circumstances.  

The Court didn’t just order his release but also called for his rehabilitation. The Uttarakhand State Legal Services Authority has been tasked with helping him reintegrate into society after decades behind bars.  

 “A child in conflict with the law should be a concern of society as a whole,” the top court said, adding, “Such a child is nothing but an inheritor of crime, a legacy which it does not wish to imbibe.”