Header Ads

test

Don’t award sentences in a cavalier manner, rules SC

NEW DELHI: Holding that punishment should be proportional to the seriousness of an offence and accused should not be let off lightly, the Supreme Court has expressed concern over the “cavalier manner” in which high courts and trial courts award insufficient or wrong sentence in some criminal cases.
A bench of Justices N V Ramana, M M Shantanagoudar and Ajay Rastogi said the courts should not lose sight of three tests — crime test, criminal test and comparative proportionality test — while deciding on quantum of sentence as accused getting away with lesser punishment would have adverse impact on society and justice system. It said a large number of cases are being filed before Supreme Court due to insufficient or wrong sentencing by the courts which must be rectified.
“We have time and again cautioned against the cavalier manner in which sentencing is dealt in certain cases. There is no gainsaying that the aspect of sentencing should not be taken for granted, as this part of criminal justice system has determinative impact on society. In light of the same, we are of the opinion that we need to provide further clarity on the same,” Justice Ramana, who wrote the judgment for the bench, said.
Explaining the three tests principle to be adhered to by all courts, Justice Ramana said, “Sentencing for crimes has to be analysed 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, anti-social 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 defence, 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).”
The court delivered the verdict while setting aside a Madhya Pradesh HC order which had reduced the sentence of four persons to four days of imprisonment already undergone by them for causing grievous injury by attacking a group of people with sticks and axes. It said the HC reduced the sentence of three years imprisonment awarded by a trial court without analysis the facts of the case, the nature of the injuries caused and the weapons used.
The bench enhanced the sentence to three months imprisonment and a fine of Rs 75,000 to three convicts. It awarded two-months’ jail to the fourth convict who is 80 year old with a Rs 50,000 fine.
[1][2][3][4]

References

  1. ^ Supreme Court (timesofindia.indiatimes.com)
  2. ^ high courts (timesofindia.indiatimes.com)
  3. ^ cavalier manner (timesofindia.indiatimes.com)
  4. ^ Madhya Pradesh (timesofindia.indiatimes.com)


from India News | Latest News Headlines & Live Updates from India - Times of India https://ift.tt/36gHCKM

No comments