Skip to main content

Tests To Be Applied While Sentencing In A Criminal Case

In CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 690 OF 2014, STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH vs UDHAM AND OTHERS, appeal is directed by the appellant­State against the   final   order   dated   06.11.2012,   passed   by   the   High   Court   of Madhya Pradesh (Gwalior Bench) in Criminal Appeal No. 659 of 2011, whereby the High Court partly allowed the appeal filed by the respondents­/accused herein and reduced the sentence awarded by the Trial Court to the period already undergone for the offences under Section 326 of the Indian Penal Code read with Section 34 of IPC, and Section 452 of the IPC.

The Supreme Court observed that the reasoning of the High Court, for passing the impugned order and partly allowing the appeals   of   the   respondents/­accused   herein,   is   limited   to   one sentence. The High Court states in its order that looking to the nature of the offence, the fact that this is the first offence of the respondents and the period of sentence already undergone by them. 

Referring to the judgment of the court in Accused  ‘X’ v. State of Maharashtra,  (2019) 7 SCC 1, the court held that there is no detailed analysis of   the   facts   of   the   case,   the   nature   of   the   injuries   caused,   the weapons used, the number of victims, etc. given by the High Court in   the   impugned   order.   The   High   Court   while   sentencing   the accused, has not taken into consideration the second charge proved against the respondents­accused herein, under Section 452 of IPC. Even the fact that the respondents­accused had only undergone sentence of 4 days at the time of passing of the impugned order,  brings into question the High Court pointing to the same as a reason for reducing their sentence.   As such, the order of the High Court merits interference by this Court. 

The Supreme Court further held that sentencing for crimes has to be analyzed on the touch stone of
three   tests   viz.,   crime   test,   criminal   test   and   comparative proportionality   test.

Crime   test   involves   factors   like   extent   of planning, choice of weapon, modus of crime, disposal modus (if any),  role of the accused, anti­social or abhorrent character of the crime, state of victim. Criminal test involves assessment of factors such as age of the criminal, gender of the criminal, economic conditions or social background of the criminal, motivation for crime, availability
of defense, state of mind, instigation by the deceased or any one from   the   deceased   group,   adequately   represented   in   the   trial,  disagreement   by   a   judge   in   the   appeal   process,   repentance, possibility of reformation, prior criminal record (not to take pending cases) and any other relevant factor (not an exhaustive list).  Additionally,   we   may   note   that   under   the   crime   test,
seriousness needs to be ascertained. The seriousness of the crime may be ascertained by (i) bodily integrity of the victim; (ii) loss of material   support   or   amenity;   (iii)   extent   of   humiliation;   and   (iv) privacy breach.

Comments

Most viewed this month

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.

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...