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

The recovery of vehicles by the financier not an offence - SC

Special Leave Petition (Crl.) No. 8907  of 2009 Anup Sarmah (Petitioner) Vs Bhola Nath Sharma & Ors.(Respondents) The petitioner submitted that  respondents-financer had forcibly taken away the vehicle financed by them and  illegally deprived the petitioner from its lawful possession  and  thus,  committed  a crime. The complaint filed by the petitioner had been  entertained  by  the Judicial Magistrate (Ist Class), Gauhati (Assam) in Complaint Case  No.  608 of 2009, even directing the interim custody of the vehicle (Maruti  Zen)  be given to the petitioner vide order dated  17.3.2009.  The respondent on approaching the Guwahati High  Court against this order, the hon'ble court squashed the criminal  proceedings  pending   before  the  learned Magistrate. After hearing both sides, the Hon'ble Supreme Court decided on 30th...

Court approached in the early stages of arbitration will prevail in all other subsequent proceedings

In National Highway Authority of India v. Hindustan Steelworks Construction Limited, the Hon'ble Delhi High Court opined that once the parties have approached a certain court for relief under Act at earlier stages of disputes then it is same court that, parties must return to for all other subsequent proceedings. Language of Section 42 of Act is categorical and brooks no exception. In fact, the language used has the effect of jurisdiction of all courts since it states that once an application has been made in Part I of the Act then ―that Court alone shall have jurisdiction over arbitral proceedings and all subsequent applications arising out of that agreement and arbitral proceedings shall be made in that Court and in no other Court. Court holds that NHAI in present case cannot take advantage of Section 14 of the Limitation Act, 1963 for explaining inordinate delay in filing present petition under Section 34 of this Act in this Court.

No Rebate For Stamp Duty Paid In Another State - Bombay HC

A three judge bench of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court (Bombay HC) in a recent judgment in the matter of Chief Controlling Revenue Authority, Maharashtra State, Pune and Superintendent of Stamp (Headquarters), Mumbai v Reliance Industries Limited, Mumbai and Reliance Petroleum Limited, Gujarat1 has held that orders in case of a scheme of arrangement under Section 391 to 394 of the Companies Act, 1956 (Act) involving different High Courts in multiple states, are separate instruments in themselves. Accordingly, stamp duty would be payable on all the orders (and consequently, all the states) without the benefit of remission, rebate or set-off.