Jail term reduction on ground of long trial not justifiable:SC

Image
Press Trust of India New Delhi
Last Updated : Apr 21 2013 | 10:20 AM IST
The agony faced by a person because of long trial cannot be a reason for a court to take a lenient view while punishing the accused and reduction of sentence merely on this ground is not justifiable, the Supreme Court has ruled.
The court said that undue sympathy to impose inadequate sentence would undermine the public confidence in the efficacy of law and the punishment awarded should be directly proportionate to the nature and the magnitude of the offence.
"We also reiterate that undue sympathy to impose inadequate sentence would do more harm to the justice system to undermine the public confidence in the efficacy of law. It is the duty of every court to award proper sentence having regard to the nature of the offence and the manner in which it was executed or committed.
"The court must not only keep in view rights of the victim of the crime but also the society at large while considering imposition of appropriate punishment," it said.
A bench headed by Justice P Sathasivam set aside the Punjab and Haryana High Court's verdict which reduced the sentence of five years imprisonment to jail term undergone to an accused who spent just 14 months behind the bars during trial on the ground that it took 14 years for courts to conclude trial and his appeal in an attempt to murder case.
"It is unfortunate that the high court failed to appreciate that the reduction of sentence merely on the ground of long pending trial is not justifiable," the bench said.
The apex court said that punishment meted out to a convict should be proportionate to the gravity of the offence.
"The cardinal principle of sentencing policy is that the sentence imposed on an offender should reflect the crime he has committed and should be proportionate to the gravity of the offence. This court has repeatedly stressed the central role of proportionality in sentencing of offenders in numerous cases," it said.
"The legislature has bestowed upon the judiciary this enormous discretion in the sentencing policy, which must be exercised with utmost care and caution. The punishment awarded should be directly proportionate to the nature and the magnitude of the offence. The benchmark of proportionate sentencing can assist the judges in arriving at a fair and impartial verdict," it further said.
*Subscribe to Business Standard digital and get complimentary access to The New York Times

Smart Quarterly

₹900

3 Months

₹300/Month

SAVE 25%

Smart Essential

₹2,700

1 Year

₹225/Month

SAVE 46%
*Complimentary New York Times access for the 2nd year will be given after 12 months

Super Saver

₹3,900

2 Years

₹162/Month

Subscribe

Renews automatically, cancel anytime

Here’s what’s included in our digital subscription plans

Exclusive premium stories online

  • Over 30 premium stories daily, handpicked by our editors

Complimentary Access to The New York Times

  • News, Games, Cooking, Audio, Wirecutter & The Athletic

Business Standard Epaper

  • Digital replica of our daily newspaper — with options to read, save, and share

Curated Newsletters

  • Insights on markets, finance, politics, tech, and more delivered to your inbox

Market Analysis & Investment Insights

  • In-depth market analysis & insights with access to The Smart Investor

Archives

  • Repository of articles and publications dating back to 1997

Ad-free Reading

  • Uninterrupted reading experience with no advertisements

Seamless Access Across All Devices

  • Access Business Standard across devices — mobile, tablet, or PC, via web or app

More From This Section

First Published: Apr 21 2013 | 10:20 AM IST

Next Story