Back
2006 Supreme(SC) 300
2006(4) Supreme 360
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Y.K. Sabharwal, CJI., P.P. Naolekar, J.
State of M.P.—Appellant
versus
Bhagwat—Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 499 of 2005
Decided on 1-4-2005
IMPORTANT POINT
For heinous crime like rape, there cannot be different standards for illiterate labourers from rural areas, as far as quantum, of sentence is concerned.
Headnote:Indian Penal Code, 1860—Section 376(1)—Offence of Rape—Imposition of sentence of 10 years by Sessions Court—Sentence reduced to four years and eight months, period already undergone by High Court in appeal—Only reasons recorded for reduction of sentence was that accused was an illiterate labourer from rural area—Validity—For heinous crime like rape, there cannot be different standards for illiterate labourers from rural areas—Having regard to severity of offence, section 376(1) IPC provides for a minimum sentence of Seven years—Special and adequate reasons are required to be recorded in judgment for imposing lesser punishments—Reasons recorded by High Court in impugned judgment for reducing sentence neither adequate nor special within meaning of Section 376(1)—Impugned judgment of High Court set aside and that of Sessions Court restored. (Paras 3 & 4)
ORDER
1. Leave granted.
2. The respondent was convicted for offences under Sections 376(1), 342 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code. For the offence punishable under Section 376(1) IPC, he was sentenced for a period of ten years. Lesser punishments were inflicted for other offences. In appeal against the order of conviction and sentence, the sentence awarded has been reduced to the period already undergone, namely, four years and eight months, insofar as the offence of rape under Section 376(1) IPC is concerned. The only reason given is that the accused is an illiterate labourer from rural area and, therefore, sentence of imprisonment deserves to be reduced to the period already undergone.
3. We are unable to sustain the view of learned Single Judge of the High Court, acceptance whereof means that for a heinous crime like rape, there are different standards for illiterate labourers from rural areas. That cannot be the position in law. Having regard to the severity of the offence, Section 376(1) IPC provides for a minimum sentence of seven years, and adequate and special reasons are required to be recorded in the judgment for imposing lesser punishments. By no stretch of imagination, the reasons recorded by the learned Single Judge in the impugned judgment and order can be held to be adequate and special reasons within the meaning of Section 376(1) IPC. The Sessions Court, on consideration of the matter, had imposed sentence of ten years. Nothing has been shown so as to justify the reduction of sentence.
4. In this view, we set aside the impugned judgment and order of the High Court and restore that of the Sessions Court. The appeal is accordingly allowed. The respondent shall be taken into custody to serve out the remaining period of sentence.
Appeal allowed.
****************
