A Child
on Death Row?
How a wrong name and age landed
a 12-year-old on death row in India
Niranaram Chetanram Chaudhary was supposed to spend only three years in jail. But when he walked free in March this year, 41 years of age, he had already spent 28 years behind bars. Seemingly, all because of an error in his name and age in his case files.
Although his story has all the makings of a movie script, this is not one.
Not only was Niranaram ‘wrongly’ imprisoned for 28 years, he spent 25 of those as a death row convict.
Image Courtesy: Project 39A
Image Courtesy: Project 39A
“When I heard that the Supreme Court ordered my release last month, I thought it was a rumour. I did not believe it could happen,” he told The Quint.
A three-judge bench of the Supreme Court concluded on 27 March that he had been tried and sentenced to death as an adult, even though he was only a 12-year-old (a juvenile) when he committed the offence.
The law (Juvenile Justice Act 2015) only allows imprisonment of up to three years and makes no provisions for sentencing juveniles to death.
But what led Niranaram here? How did he find out that his age and name were botched up? And who is to blame for this?
We answer through this multimedia immersive.
Chapter One
The Case
Niranaram was arrested in 1994 and sentenced to death four years later by a trial court in Pune on charges of murdering five women and two children, along with two accomplices.
Although he is from Jalabsar in Rajasthan, he says he ran away from home and wandered around until he reached Pune.
“I don’t remember in detail how I got there. I have no memories of the crime either,” he added.
While ordering his release last month, the Supreme Court noted:
“The other factor which has crossed our mind is as to whether a boy of 12 years could commit such a gruesome crime. We possess no knowledge of child psychology or criminology to take into account this factor while examining the report of the Inquiring Judge.”
But what the top court did confirm was that he was tried and then put on death row on the assumption that he was 20 years old until…
Chapter One
The Case
Niranaram was arrested in 1994 and sentenced to death four years later by a trial court in Pune on charges of murdering five women and two children, along with two accomplices.
Although he is from Jalabsar in Rajasthan, he says he ran away from home and wandered around until he reached Pune.
“I don’t remember in detail how I got there. I have no memories of the crime either,” he added.
While ordering his release last month, the Supreme Court noted:
“The other factor which has crossed our mind is as to whether a boy of 12 years could commit such a gruesome crime. We possess no knowledge of child psychology or criminology to take into account this factor while examining the report of the Inquiring Judge.”
But what the top court did confirm was that he was tried and then put on death row on the assumption that he was 20 years old until…
Chapter Two
The Discovery
Niranaram was applying for a graduation course in prison for which he had asked his family in Rajasthan to send over some documents. While going over those documents in 2005, he found out that he was a juvenile at the time of the offence.
“The most astounding thing about his story is that he himself discovered that the law could allow him to get out while he was pursuing his education in prison. No one went and told him he was eligible to get out,” said Shreya Rastogi of Project 39A, the National Law University (Delhi) initiative that aided his release.
How did Niranaram react when he found out he had been wrongly imprisoned?
“I am not angry. What is the point? I won’t get back the time I lost, so I have let it go. I am the kind of person who knows that that which is gone won’t come back. I believe in being happy with what you have and making better use of the future.”
During the same year, the Supreme Court (in Pratap Singh vs State Of Jharkhand) had clarified that for a juvenility claim to be raised, the age of the accused at the time of the alleged offence had to be considered.
Niranaram read about this in the newspapers and realised that this applied to him too.
While the police had written down the wrong age at the time of his arrest, how the wrong name found its way to his files is not entirely clear.
“What often happens in Maharashtra is that names are shortened. So if someone’s name is Tukaram, people start calling them Tuka. On top of that my name is a little complex — so from Niranaram I became Narayan,” he said.
“People started calling me Narayan and I did not realise back then that this would alter the course of my life so significantly,” he added.
In fact, the inquiry report by the trial court judge that led to his release said this too.
However, since neither the Supreme Court nor his lawyers had access to the initial case files, absolute clarity on how his name and age got wrongly noted is lacking.
Chapter Two
The Discovery
Niranaram was applying for a graduation course in prison for which he had asked his family in Rajasthan to send over some documents. While going over those documents in 2005, he found out that he was a juvenile at the time of the offence.
“The most astounding thing about his story is that he himself discovered that the law could allow him to get out while he was pursuing his education in prison. No one went and told him he was eligible to get out,” said Shreya Rastogi of Project 39A, the National Law University (Delhi) initiative that aided his release.
How did Niranaram react when he found out he had been wrongly imprisoned?
“I am not angry. What is the point? I won’t get back the time I lost, so I have let it go. I am the kind of person who knows that that which is gone won’t come back. I believe in being happy with what you have and making better use of the future.”
During the same year, the Supreme Court (in Pratap Singh vs State Of Jharkhand) had clarified that for a juvenility claim to be raised, the age of the accused at the time of the alleged offence had to be considered.
Niranaram read about this in the newspapers and realised that this applied to him too.
While the police had written down the wrong age at the time of his arrest, how the wrong name found its way to his files is not entirely clear.
“What often happens in Maharashtra is that names are shortened. So if someone’s name is Tukaram, people start calling them Tuka. On top of that my name is a little complex — so from Niranaram I became Narayan,” he said.
“People started calling me Narayan and I did not realise back then that this would alter the course of my life so significantly,” he added.
In fact, the inquiry report by the trial court judge that led to his release said this too.
However, since neither the Supreme Court nor his lawyers had access to the initial case files, absolute clarity on how his name and age got wrongly noted is lacking.
Chapter Three
The Process
Although Niranaram knew in 2005 that he should have been let out after three years, relief came for him only in 2023.
What took so long?
As soon as he realised what had happened, Niranaram urged prison authorities to send him for a medical examination necessary for determining his age.
The results, however, came back with a very wide range. The test said that in 2005, he could be anywhere between 22 and 40 years old, which meant he could have been between 11 and 29 years old at the time of the incident.
This could not confirm what Niranaram had been saying all along. Only one thing could: documents from his school (where he had dropped out from in Class 3).
After struggling to get a hold of all necessary documents and speaking to a few human rights lawyers in the interim, he finally chanced upon Project 39A in 2014, who took this to the Supreme Court.
The top court began hearing the case in 2018 and directed a trial court judge to verify all the documents presented before it. The arguments in the case concluded in September 2022 and the verdict came in March 2023.
Chapter Three
The Process
Although Niranaram knew in 2005 that he should have been let out after three years, relief came for him only in 2023.
What took so long?
As soon as he realised what had happened, Niranaram urged prison authorities to send him for a medical examination necessary for determining his age.
The results, however, came back with a very wide range. The test said that in 2005, he could be anywhere between 22 and 40 years old, which meant he could have been between 11 and 29 years old at the time of the incident.
This could not confirm what Niranaram had been saying all along. Only one thing could: documents from his school (where he had dropped out from in Class 3).
After struggling to get a hold of all necessary documents and speaking to a few human rights lawyers in the interim, he finally chanced upon Project 39A in 2014, who took this to the Supreme Court.
The top court began hearing the case in 2018 and directed a trial court judge to verify all the documents presented before it. The arguments in the case concluded in September 2022 and the verdict came in March 2023.
Chapter Four
Who Is To Blame?
“The instant case reflects gross lethargic and negligent attitude of the State,” the top court had said while directing an inquiry into Niranaram’s case in 2019.
But the team that worked on his case says that responsibility lies not with one, but with multiple parties.
“This begins right from the investigating officers in the case who did not properly verify his name and age, the magistrate he was first produced before, his own defence lawyers at different stages of the criminal proceedings,'' Rastogi told The Quint.
According to her, even the prosecutors, and the judges who heard the case before it finally reached the Supreme Court, are to blame too.
“It doesn't bar any of us from the responsibility of raising the claim,” she said.
So, should he now be compensated?
Currently, Indian laws do not allow compensation to those who have been wrongly tried or convicted.
“The compensation given to victims too is inadequate. Whether it is the victim or the accused — compensating them is something that our law needs to build in very strongly and ensure that there is implementation of that,” Rastogi adds.
Chapter Four
Who Is To Blame?
“The instant case reflects gross lethargic and negligent attitude of the State,” the top court had said while directing an inquiry into Niranaram’s case in 2019.
But the team that worked on his case says that responsibility lies not with one, but with multiple parties.
“This begins right from the investigating officers in the case who did not properly verify his name and age, the magistrate he was first produced before, his own defence lawyers at different stages of the criminal proceedings,'' Rastogi told The Quint.
According to her, even the prosecutors, and the judges who heard the case before it finally reached the Supreme Court, are to blame too.
“It doesn't bar any of us from the responsibility of raising the claim,” she said.
So, should he now be compensated?
Currently, Indian laws do not allow compensation to those who have been wrongly tried or convicted.
“The compensation given to victims too is inadequate. Whether it is the victim or the accused — compensating them is something that our law needs to build in very strongly and ensure that there is implementation of that,” Rastogi adds.
Chapter Five
The Big Picture
Despite the dramatic turn of events in Niranaram’s case, he is not the only one to have experienced this.
In fact, as Rastogi put it:
“Those who are able to file juvenility claims are the lucky ones.”
She added, “It boggles the mind to think how many prisoners die without knowing about this or without being able to bring this up with the authorities.”
Right before this, the Supreme Court, set aside the death sentence imposed on a man from Madhya Pradesh for the rape and murder of a minor girl. In this case too, the man was found to be a juvenile at the time of the offence.
But should children accused of such heinous crimes be let off in three years? Yes, say experts, and they explain why.
“We are not saying that there is no perpetrator and no victim, nor that all young people who commit crimes are to be treated as victims or not held accountable. The tragedy is that the law is always changed in light of the few – there are some children who are truly violent or not amenable to reform, but they are a minority,” Enakshi Ganguly, the co-founder of HAQ Centre for Child Rights, pointed out in an interview with Project 39A.
“Long periods of incarceration impact young people. It impacts their chances of reformation. All we ask is that a young person’s rights be protected as well. The treatment given to them should be appropriate to their age and the stage of their life,” she added.
Chapter Five
The Big Picture
Despite the dramatic turn of events in Niranaram’s case, he is not the only one to have experienced this.
In fact, as Rastogi put it:
“Those who are able to file juvenility claims are the lucky ones.”
She added, “It boggles the mind to think how many prisoners die without knowing about this or without being able to bring this up with the authorities.”
Right before this, the Supreme Court, set aside the death sentence imposed on a man from Madhya Pradesh for the rape and murder of a minor girl. In this case too, the man was found to be a juvenile at the time of the offence.
But should children accused of such heinous crimes be let off in three years? Yes, say experts, and they explain why.
“We are not saying that there is no perpetrator and no victim, nor that all young people who commit crimes are to be treated as victims or not held accountable. The tragedy is that the law is always changed in light of the few – there are some children who are truly violent or not amenable to reform, but they are a minority,” Enakshi Ganguly, the co-founder of HAQ Centre for Child Rights, pointed out in an interview with Project 39A.
“Long periods of incarceration impact young people. It impacts their chances of reformation. All we ask is that a young person’s rights be protected as well. The treatment given to them should be appropriate to their age and the stage of their life,” she added.
Chapter Six
Niranaram’s Future
Wrongful imprisonment has not deterred Niranaram from pursuing his dreams, or from doing what he loves most: reading.
“I like reading a lot. When I was in jail I used to read a lot of books and newspapers but after I walked out of jail, I discovered social media. I have been reading a lot of things on social media,” he laughs.
While in prison, he finished his graduation and went on to pursue a Master's degree in Sociology and Political Science.
“I want to continue my education, become a lawyer and help those like me,” he said.
Chapter Six
Niranaram’s Future
Wrongful imprisonment has not deterred Niranaram from pursuing his dreams, or from doing what he loves most: reading.
“I like reading a lot. When I was in jail I used to read a lot of books and newspapers but after I walked out of jail, I discovered social media. I have been reading a lot of things on social media,” he laughs.
While in prison, he finished his graduation and went on to pursue a Master's degree in Sociology and Political Science.
“I want to continue my education, become a lawyer and help those like me,” he said.
Credits
Reporter
Rohini Roy
Illustrator
Vibhushita Singh
Creative Producer
Kamran Akhter
Video Producer
Shohini Bose
Video Editor
Prajjwal Kumar
Web Developer
Achintya De
Senior Editor
Mekhala Saran
Creative Directors
Naman Shah
Meghnad Bose
Built with Shorthand