As per the case facts, the appellant was found guilty by lower courts of serious offenses against a young female child, including assault and murder. The appeal was lodged to ... examine the correctness of these conclusions and the imposed death penalty. The question arose whether the concurrent findings of guilt were correct and if the death penalty was appropriate under the "rarest of rare" category, or if a lesser sentence should be awarded considering mitigating circumstances. Finally, the Supreme Court partly allowed the appeals. The Court modified the impugned order from the High Court, awarding life imprisonment without remission extending to the natural life of the appellant instead of the death penalty. This decision was based on a discussion of mitigating circumstances, including the appellant's socio-economic background, lack of schooling, early work, and good conduct in prison, and the threshold of the "rarest of rare" category for the death penalty.