Skip to main content

Courts should impose punishment befitting crime: SC

Befitting punishment should be awarded by courts to the guilty so that "public abhorrence" of the offence committed is reflected, the Supreme Court has said.

"The question of awarding sentence is a matter of discretion to be exercised on consideration of circumstances aggravating and mitigating in the individual cases. Law courts have been consistent in the approach that a reasonable proportion has to be maintained between the seriousness of the crime and the punishment.

"While it is true that sentence disproportionately severe should not be passed that does not clothe the court with an option to award the sentence manifestly inadequate. Justice demands that courts should impose punishment befitting the crime so that the courts reflect public abhorrence of the crime," a bench comprising justices T S Thakur and R Banumathi said.

The observations came while hearing an appeal filed by Haryana native Ravinder Singh who had approached the apex court against Punjab and Haryana High Court judgement by which it had reduced the sentence imposed on six persons who had assaulted his father.

According to the prosecution, on August 4, 1993, while Sher Singh was returning home from bus station of his village Devsar with his elder brother Duli Chand, six persons-- Pyare Lal, Ramesh, Surender, Raj Kumar, Manphool and Narender-- assaulted Duli Chand with sticks due to which he sustained grievous injuries.

Later, Duli was taken to general Hospital in Bhiwani where he slipped in coma and succumbed to injuries on August 9, 1993.

The trial court had convicted all the six persons under Section 304 Part II (culpable homicide not amounting to murder) of IPC and sentenced them to seven years rigorous imprisonment.

Aggrieved by the judgment, the accused approached High Court which reduced the sentence of imprisonment to the period already undergone by each of them and also imposed a fine of Rs 25,000 each.

The apex court, which refused to interfere with High Court's decision, enhanced the compensation to the family and directed them to pay Rs 1,25,000 each along with additional fine of Rs 1 lakh each.

"As far as the award of compensation is concerned, particularly in the case of homicidal death, monetary benefits cannot be equated with the life of a person and the society?s cry for justice. Object is just to mitigate hardship that is caused to the deceased," the bench said.

Article referred: http://zeenews.india.com/news/india/courts-should-impose-punishment-befitting-crime-sc_1632468.html

Comments

Most viewed this month

Deposit Of Minimum 20% Fine/Compensation U/s 148 NI Act Mandatory

In OP(Crl.).No.348 OF 2019, T.K.SAJEEVAN vs FRANCIS T.CHACKO, the appeal was filed against the order of the lower court to deposit 25% of the fine before filling of appeal. The appellant argued that the deposit introduced through the Section 148 of the NI Act after amendment was directory in nature as it used the term 'may' while mentioning the issue of deposit. The Kerala High Court however disagreeing held that in view of the object of the Legislature while incorporating Section 148 into N.I. Act, the word 'may' will have to be read as 'shall'. The imposition of payment contemplated under Section 148 N.I. Act cannot be restricted to some prosecutions and evaded in other prosecutions. Since the amount directed to be deposited being compensation, undoubtedly, it is liable to be ordered to be deposited irrespective of the nature of the prosecution. Therefore, the word 'may' can only be taken to have the colour and meaning of 'shall' and there

NCLT - Mere admission of receipt of money does not qualify as a financial debt

Cause Title : Meghna Devang Juthani Vs Ambe Securities Private Limited, National Company Law Tribunal, Mumbai, CP (IB) No. 974/MB-VI/2020 Date of Judgment/Order : 18.12.2023 Corum : Hon’ble Shri K. R. Saji Kumar, Member (Judicial) Hon’ble Shri Sanjiv Dutt, Member (Technical) Citied:  Carnoustie Management India Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CBS International Projects Private Limited, NCLT Swiss Ribbons Pvt. Ltd. & Anr vs. Union of India & Ors. (2019) Sanjay Kewalramani vs Sunil Parmanand Kewalramani & Ors. (2018) Pawan Kumar vs. Utsav Securities Pvt Ltd 2021 Background Application was filed under section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 alleging loan of Rs, 1.70 cr is due. The Applicate identified herself as the widow and heir of the lender but could not produce any documents proving financial contract between her Late husband and the CD but claimed that the CD has accepted that money was received from her husband. The applicant subsequently filed rejoinder claiming the debt t

Vanishing promoters and languishing shareholders

Over Rs 60,000 crore of shareholders’ wealth is stuck in 1,450 companies suspended by the stock exchanges. More importantly, near 100 per cent pledging of promoter holding appears to be common in many of these companies. This, almost rules out any chance of the companies bouncing back. The suspension is for non-compliance of the listing norms. Vanishing Companies - Definition As per the definition stipulated by SEBI, any listed company, which raised moneythrough initial public offer and, thereafter, stopped operations, did not file returnseither with the RoC or SEBI and did not exist on the registered premises wastermed as vanishing.There are provisions under Companies Act under which companies are termedvanishing companies on satisfying certain conditions. it is provided a companywould be deemed to be a vanishing company, if it satisfies all the conditions given below : a) Failed to file returns with Registrar of Companies (ROC) for a period of two years; b) Failed to fil