“At the same time, the court cannot ignore the fact that the acts of the accused questioned the dignity of the woman. The victim’s right to safety was violated, and she was subjected to fear, humiliation, and helplessness. This also caused her psychological trauma. It should also be considered that she was attacked while on her way to a friend’s house, and that the incident was unexpected. However, the court also considers the age of the accused, their family circumstances, and the argument that, except for the first accused, the others have no other criminal background. All the accused are below 40 years of age. The observations made by the Supreme Court in the Nirbhaya case (Mukesh v. State of Delhi) are relevant here. Crimes against women affect not only their dignity but also the progress of society. The judgment also mentions the need to raise public awareness regarding gender justice. In light of the circumstances mentioned above, the court finds that this is not a situation requiring the imposition of the maximum punishment,” the order said, awarding the sentence.

The court also noted mitigating factors: the age of the accused, their family circumstances, and the fact that, except for Suni, none of the others had any other criminal background. 

Earlier in the day, the courtroom witnessed tense scenes as the judge, prosecution, survivor’s counsel TB Mini, and defence teams assembled at 10.15 am The accused, brought under heavy escort from Viyyur, heard the prosecution call for a life term, describing the assault as a “gang-rape case” that required the strongest possible message.

The defence argued that sentencing must reflect the different roles played by each accused. The judge also questioned the demand for a uniform sentence, asking whether one accused should receive the maximum and others the minimum based on background and involvement.