The Delhi High Court has rejected a plea of the prosecution that an explanation be sought from lower court judges for allegedly imposing lesser punishment to convicts in corruption cases.
A convict, if awarded a jail term up to three years in a criminal case, is entitled to bail or suspension of sentence under the Criminal Procedure Code.
"As regards the submission of Additional Public Prosecutor (Ritu Gauba) for the State that a explanation be sought from the judicial officers of Delhi Higher Judicial services as to why lesser punishment is imposed upon them (convicts).
"No such direction is called for, inasmuch as if the State is aggrieved by the lesser punishment, appropriate remedy is available by filing appeal for enhancement of sentence," a bench of Justice Sunita Gupta said.
The court said awarding of sentence is the discretionary power of the trial judge as "no minimum" sentence has been prescribed under the Prevention of Corruption (PC) Act.
The observations came in an order by which the high court granted bail to convict Dinesh Chand Sharma who had filed the appeal against the trial court order awarding two years jail term to him under various provisions of the PC Act.
Chand, working as a 'patwari' with SDM's office, was found guilty of taking bribe for allowing a person to raise unauthorised construction on a plot in south Delhi here.
The additional public prosecutor said that the provisions of the PC Act, under which Sharma had been convicted, provide for the maximum jail term of seven years.
However, the lower court awarded two years jail to the convict and this entitled him to get statutory bail, she had said.
The high court said that the awarding sentence is the discretion of the judges and the state has got the legal right to seek enhancement of the punishment.
