Is marrying victim or member of victim’s family the way out of jail time?

Two recent SC decisions have placed domestic stability above the punishment due to a convicted man

Two recent decisions of the Supreme Court raise the question whether a convicted man can spare himself years of jail time by entering into what seems to be a rather opportune marriage with his victim or to a member of the victim's family.

In June, the apex court used its extraordinary power under Article 142 to release a man convicted of attempt to murder because he married his victim's sister while the case was still pending in the Madras High Court.

The top court noted that all the people involved were living in the same locality. The parties involved had approached the Supreme Court to set aside the conviction "in order to bring peace and in order to live cordially". The accused had spent just 18 months in jail.

"In the peculiar facts and circumstances of this case, particularly when there is a marriage within the families of the injured and the accused, we consider it a fit case wherein this court could exercise its power under Article 142 of the Constitution. We, therefore, permit the parties to compound the offence," the court observed in its order.

The second case, in May, also from Tamil Nadu, concerned a man who was convicted under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act for raping his minor niece. He had later married her.

Taking note that the custom of avunculate marriage existed in Tamil Nadu, the apex court set aside his conviction, reasoning that it did not want to “disturb” their “marriage” and “happy family life”. The court said its decision was based, again, on the "peculiar facts and circumstances of the case" and should not be used as precedent.

In both cases, the top court seems to have placed the idea of domestic stability above the punishment due to a convicted man.