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

Valuation Report of Jewellery once made is effective for Four Assessment Years

The division Bench of the Delhi High Court in Pr.Commissioner of Wealth Tax vs. Raghu Hari Dalmia held that a valuation report made by a registered valuer once adopted shall be in effect for four assessment years unless an event has occurred whereby the value is increased or decreased. The High Court made it clear that the event of “search” under Section 132 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 cannot compel the assessee to undertake a fresh valuation.

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...

Mere Agreement To Sell The Leased Property To Tenant Would Not Terminate Landlord-Tenant Relationship

In CIVIL APPEAL Nos. 1237­1238 OF 2019, Dr. H.K. Sharma vs Shri Ram Lal, the tenant had objected against the eviction suit filed by the landlord, claiming that the landlord-tenant relationship between them had ceased to exist by virtue of an agreement for sale entered between them and that he has already paid some money in advance based on the agreement. The tenant contented as the landlord-tenant relationship did not exist, the landlord cannot evict him. The matter went through various forums and finally landed before the Supreme Court in appeal. The Supreme Court referring to the judgment in Shah Mathuradas Maganlal & Co. vs. Nagappa Shankarappa Malage & Ors., held that in the instant case the lease agreement included no clauses on the fate of the tenancy. A fortiori, the parties did not intend to surrender the tenancy rights despite entering into an agreement of sale of the tenanted property. In other words, if the parties really intended to surrender their tenancy ...