In a significant judgment aimed at addressing the most heinous forms of violence against children, the Madhya Pradesh High Court has upheld the death sentence awarded to a man convicted of the brutal sexual assault and murder of a five-year-old girl in Bhopal.

The Division Bench, comprising Justice Vivek Agarwal and Justice Ramkumar Choubey, observed that the crime displayed "extreme depravity" and "lust-driven barbarity," leaving no room for reform or leniency. The Court confirmed that the case falls squarely within the "rarest of rare" category, a legal standard used in India to determine when capital punishment is appropriate.

The case dates back to September 24, 2024, when a five-year-old girl went missing from her home in Bhopal. Despite an intensive search by the parents and local police, she could not be found for two days.

On September 26, 2024, the investigation led the police to a flat in Bajpai Nagar, Eidgah Hills. Upon entering the premises, officers were met with a foul smell emanating from the bathroom. Inside, they discovered a white plastic water tank containing the decomposed body of the child. The discovery sent shockwaves through the community, leading to the arrest of the accused, Atul Nihale, under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) and the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act.

The article of the prosecution relied heavily on the medical evidence provided by a forensic team from AIIMS Bhopal. The post-mortem report painted a chilling picture of the assault. The child had suffered extensive trauma to the pelvic region and lacerations of internal organs.

The medical experts concluded that:

The death was homicidal (caused by another person).
The injuries were caused before death (ante-mortem).
The nature of the sexual assault involved extreme violence, including the use of a knife.

A crucial piece of evidence that sealed the fate of the accused was the DNA analysis. Biological material found on the victim’s clothing and the blood-stained articles recovered from the accused's flat—including a knife—matched the DNA profile of the accused. The High Court noted that this "unbroken chain of forensic evidence" was more than sufficient to establish guilt beyond any reasonable doubt.

The defense attempted to argue that the accused had been falsely implicated and that the testimonies of the child’s parents should be ignored as they were "interested witnesses" (people personally invested in the outcome).

However, the Bench firmly rejected this logic. The Court remarked that grieving parents would have no reason to protect the actual killer while falsely accusing an innocent man. Furthermore, the defense pleaded for mercy based on the accused’s mental state, claiming he might not have understood the consequences of his actions.

The Court dismissed this plea, noting that medical evaluations showed no sign of mental disorder or incapacity. The Bench found that the accused was fully aware of his actions and had even taken calculated steps to hide the body in a water tank to avoid detection.

The most critical part of the High Court's judgment focused on the sentencing. In India, the death penalty is not the default punishment for murder; it is only reserved for cases that are so exceptionally wicked that they "shock the collective conscience of society."

To decide this, the Court referred to landmark Supreme Court cases:

Bachan Singh v. State of Punjab: Which established the "Rarest of Rare" rule.
Machhi Singh v. State of Punjab: Which provided guidelines on how to balance "aggravating" factors (reasons for a harsher sentence) against "mitigating" factors (reasons for a lighter sentence).

Aggravating Factors (Why Death Penalty was Upheld):

The Age of the Victim: A helpless five-year-old child who was unable to defend herself.
Extreme Brutality: The use of a knife during the sexual assault and the extent of the internal injuries.
Criminal History: The accused had previous criminal records, suggesting he was a threat to society.
Breach of Trust: The crime took place in a residential area where the child should have been safe.

Mitigating Factors Rejected:

The defense argued that the accused’s socio-economic background, his marital status, and his responsibilities toward his own children should be considered to reduce his sentence to life imprisonment.

The High Court disagreed. The Bench held that these personal circumstances cannot outweigh the "sheer depravity" of the crime. The Court stated that while reformative justice (giving a criminal a chance to change) is a core part of Indian law, some crimes are so barbaric that they forfeit the offender's right to live in society.

The judgment emphasized that the law must reflect the society's demand for justice. The Bench observed:

"The assault reflected a lust-driven barbarity and an utter disregard for human dignity... sentencing must respond not only to the offender but also to the societal demand for justice, especially in cases that scar the moral fabric of the community."

By confirming the death reference and dismissing the appeal filed by the accused, the High Court has sent a stern message regarding the safety of children.

The confirmation of the death penalty by the Madhya Pradesh High Court marks the conclusion of the judicial process at the state level for this case. The judgment stands as a testament to the role of forensic science in modern criminal trials and the judiciary's commitment to protecting the most vulnerable members of society.

Case Title: Atul Nihale V. The State of Madhya Pradesh
Judgment Date: January 22, 2026
Bench: Justice Vivek Agarwal and Justice Ramkumar Choubey