CA commutes teenager’s death penalty to 7-year-jail

The Court of Appeal has commuted the death sentence of a teenager to seven-year imprisonment after taking into consideration the new amendments brought to the Penal Code in 2021 that death sentence should not be pronounced against a person who is under the age of 18 years, at the time of the commission of an offence.

The Court of Appeal Judges Nissanka Bandula Karunaratne and Justice R. Gurusinghe held that affirming a death sentence on an accused who was 15 years, at the time of the commission of the offence would amount to a violation of the provisions of section 53 of the Penal Code. The Appeal Court decided to refrain from affirming the death sentence imposed on the accused by High Court. Therefore, the death sentence imposed on the appellant is set aside.  

The Attorney General had filed indictments against the accused in the High Court of Ratnapura for committing the murder of another individual after hitting with a cricket stump on the 14th of May 2002. By judgment dated 3rd October 2018, the Ratnapura High Court convicted the accused for committing the murder and he was sentenced to death. Being aggrieved by the said conviction and the sentence, the accused filed an appeal in the Court of Appeal.

Senior Counsel Darshana Kuruppu appearing for the accused had told court that the accused was only 15 years old at the time of the commission of the offence, and he further argued that the punishment of death should not have been imposed on him, in terms of section 53 of the Penal Code.
Section 53 of the Penal Code was amended by Act No. 25 of 2021. 

According to the new Section 53 of the Penal Code Sentence of death shall not be pronounced against any person who is under the age of 18 years, at the time of the commission of an offence. The court shall, in lieu of sentencing such a person to death, sentence him to be detained in an institution established under any written law for the detention of persons under the age of 18, for a period specified in the sentence.

Considering all mitigating factors, the Court of Appeal imposed on the accused seven years Rigorous Imprisonment, to take effect from the date of conviction in 2018. (Lakmal Sooriyagoda)