SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
B.N. Agrawal, A.K. Mathur, JJ.
Sanjit Datta - Appellant
Versus
State of Tripura and another - Respondents
Criminal Appeals Nos. 1481-82 of 2005, Arising out of SLPs (Crl.) Nos. 4497-98 of 2005
Decided On : 07-11-2005
Indian Penal Code - Section 354 and Section 457 - The court considered the compounding of the offence under Section 457 and reduced the sentence to the period already undergone.
Fact of the Case:
The appellant was convicted under Section 354 and Section 457 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to imprisonment. Both sentences were to run concurrently. The High Court dismissed the revision petition.
Finding of the Court:
The court allowed the appeals in part, upholding the convictions but reducing the sentences to the period already undergone. The appellant was discharged from the liability of bail bonds.
Issues: Compounding of the offence under Section 457, consideration of the effect of compounding on sentencing.
Ratio Decidendi: Even if the offence is not compoundable, the court can take into consideration the effect of compounding while awarding the sentence.
Final Decision: The appeals were allowed in part, upholding the convictions but reducing the sentences to the period already undergone.
ORDER :
B.N. Agrawal, J.
Heard learned counsel for the parties.
2. Leave granted.
3. The appellant was convicted under Section 354 of the Penal Code (for short "Indian Penal Code") and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of one-and-a-half years. He was further convicted under Section 457 Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of six months. On appeal being preferred, the convictions and sentences were upheld, but it was directed that both the sentences shall run concurrently. The High Court dismissed the revision petition. Hence, these appeals by special leave.
4. Both the parties have filed petitions for compounding the offence. So far as the offence under Section 457 Indian Penal Code is concerned, the same is not compoundable, but it is well settled that even if the offence is not compoundable, while awarding sentence, the court can take into consideration the effect of compounding. It has been stated that the appellant has remained in custody for a period of about three months. In our view, it would be just and expedient to reduce the sentence of imprisonment awarded to the appellant to the period already undergone.
5. Accordingly, the appeals are allowed in part and while upholding the convictions, the sentences of imprisonment awarded against the appellant are reduced to the period already undergone. The appellant, who is on bail, is discharged from the liability of bail bonds.
Appeals partly allowed.
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.