2009(3) Supreme 501
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Dr. Arijit Pasayat, D.K. Jain and Dr. Mukundakam Sharma, JJ
State of M.P. — Appellant (s)
versus
Basodi — Respondent (s)
Criminal Appeal No. 1002 of 2004
Decided on : 27-04-2009
(b) Judicial Review – Sentencing policy – Sentence should be proportional to the gravity of the offence – Every court is duty bound to award proper sentence having regard to the nature of the offence and the manner in which it was executed or committed etc. (Paras 7 to 10)
(1987) 2 SCR 710; AIR 1991 SC 1463; 402 US 183: 28 L.D. 2d 711; (1994)4 SCC 353; (1994)2 SCC 220; (1996)2 SCC 175 – Relied upon.
(c) Indian Penal Code, 1860 – Section 376 (1) ad (2) – Without mentioning ‘adequate and special reasons’ there is no scope for awarding a sentence less than the minimum – Accused belonging to rural area and scheduled tribe, and being an illiterate labourer can by no stretch of imagination be considered either adequate or special reason. (Paras 17 and 18)
(2005)5 SCC 413; (2008)1 SCC 234 – Relied upon.
Facts of the case :
1. During hearing of the appeal before the High Court the conviction was not questioned and only the sentence was stated to be high.
2. By the impugned judgment the High Court while upholding the conviction of the respondent for offence punishable under Section 376 of the IPC reduced the sentence to the period already undergone on the ground that the accused was an illiterate labourer and belonged to Scheduled Tribe.
Finding of the Court :
Impugned judgment is unsustainable.
Result : Appeal allowed.
JUDGMENT
Dr. Arijit Pasayat, J.—
1. Challenge in this appeal is to the judgment of a learned Single Judge of the Madhya Pradesh High Court at Jabalpur. By the impugned judgment the High Court while upholding the conviction of the respondent for offence punishable under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (in short the ‘IPC’) reduced the sentence to the period already undergone. It is to be noted that during hearing of the appeal before the High Court the conviction was not questioned and only the sentence was stated to be high.
2. High Court reduced the period to already undergone on the ground that the accused was an illiterate labourer and belonged to Scheduled Tribe.
3. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the reasons indicated do not justify the reduction. There is no appearance on behalf of the respondent in spite of service of notice.
4. The crucial question which needs to be decided is the proper sentence and acceptability of reasons which weighed with learned Single Judge. It is to be noted that the sentences prescribed for offences relatable to Section 376 are imprisonment for life or up to a period of 10 years.
5. The offence of rape occurs in Chapter XVI of IPC. It is an offence affecting the human body. In that Chapter, there is a separate heading for ‘Sexual offence’, which encompasses Sections 375, 376, 376-A, 376-B, 376-C, and 376-D. ‘Rape’ is defined in Section 375. Sections 375 and 376 have been substantially changed by Criminal Law (Amendment) Act, 1983, and several new sections were introduced by the new Act, i.e. 376-A, 376-B, 376-C and 376-D. The fact that sweeping changes were introduced reflects the legislative intent to curb with iron hand, the offence of rape which affects the dignity of a woman. The offence of rape in its simplest term is ‘the ravishment of a woman, without her consent, by force, fear or fraud’, or as ‘the carnal knowledge of a woman by force against her will’. ‘Rape’ or ‘Raptus’ is when a man hath carnal knowledge of a woman by force and against her will (Co. Litt. 123-b); or as expressed more fully,’ rape is the carnal knowledge of any woman, above the age of particular years, against her will; or of a woman child, under that age, with or against her will’ (Hale PC 628). The essential words in an indictment for rape are rapuit and carnaliter cognovit; but carnaliter cognovit, nor any other circumlocution without the word rapuit, are not sufficient in a legal sense to express rape; 1 Hon.6, 1a, 9 Edw. 4, 26 a (Hale PC 628). In the crime of rape, ‘carnal knowledge’ means the penetration to any the slightest degree of the organ alleged to have been carnally known by the male organ of generation (Stephen’s “Criminal Law” 9th Ed. p.262). In ‘Encyclopedia of Crime and Justice’ (Volume 4, page 1356) it is stated “......even slight penetration is sufficient and emission is unnecessary”. In Halsbury’s Statutes of England and Wales (Fourth Edition) Volume 12, it is stated that even the slightest degree of penetration is sufficient to prove sexual intercourse. It is violation with violence of the private person of a woman-an-outrage by all means. By the very nature of the offence it is an obnoxious act of the highest order.
6. The physical scar may heal up, but the mental scar will always remain. When a woman is ravished, what is inflicted is not merely physical injury but the deep sense of some deathless shame. The offender robs the victim of her most valuable and priceless possession that is dignity.
7. The law regulates social interests, arbitrates conflicting claims and demands. Security of persons and property of the people is an essential function of the State. It could be achieved through instrumentality of criminal law. Undoubtedly, there is a cross cultural conflict where living law must find answer to the new challenges and the courts are required to mould the sentencing system to meet the challenges. The contagion of lawlessness would undermine social order and
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.