Trial judge can’t reduce minimum sentence: Karnataka HC | Bengaluru News – Times of India

0
43

[google-translator]

BENGALURU: When a statute prescribes a minimum sentence, the trial or appellate judge has no discretion to reduce it, the Kalaburagi bench of the Karnataka high court observed in a recent judgement.
Applying the principle laid down by the Supreme Court in Mohd Hashim vs State of Uttar Pradesh and others in relation to the concept of minimum sentence, Justice V Shrishananda allowed the criminal appeal filed by Bhalki Town police and enhanced the five-year imprisonment awarded to an accused in a case under Section 4 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (Pocso) Act, 2012, to seven years. The accused has been directed to surrender to police on or before January 31, 2023 to serve the reminder period of the sentence.
As could be seen from Section 4 of the Pocso Act (Unamended), the minimum sentence that was to be imposed after finding the accused guilty, is seven years. It is pertinent to note that since the statute has prescribed a minimum sentence of seven years for the offence punishable under section 4 of the Pocso Act, the special judge did not have any power whatsoever to reduce the minimum sentence to five years. Perhaps, the said aspect of the matter has missed the notice of the special judge while passing the order of the sentence,” Justice Shrishananda noted in his order.
However, with regard to the appellant’s plea for imposing maximum punishment, the judge said the material on record would not make a case for sentence to be passed for more than seven years. This takes into consideration that the incident happened in 2013 and the girl was then13 years and the accused had already spent the period of imprisonment as ordered by the trial court.
The judge also negated the argument on behalf of the accused that he could not have been sentenced under section 376 of Indian Penal Code for rape after having been held guilty under section 4 of the Pocso Act, saying that section 42 of the Pocso Act provides for the same.
The accused, a labourer, was arrested in 2013, on charges of raping a minor girl. On September 7, 2015, the special court at Bidar held him guilty, both under section 376 of IPC and also under section 4 of Pocso Act and imposed 5 years simple imprisonment with Rs 2,000 fine, in both counts.
Challenging the judgment, Bhalki Town police contended that the offence punishable under section 376 of IPC is for life or 10 years imprisonment with fine but the trial court has not given any reasons for awarding the reduced punishment and hence it was inadequate and liable to be modified.
The appellant had also pointed out that the trial court, after having found that the prosecution has proved the case by examining all material important witnesses, could not have awarded a sentence lesser than the prescribed minimum sentence under section 4 of the Pocso Act.
Bhalki Town police argued that the accused, who ruined the future of a minor girl, had not given any satisfactory explanation in defence of the reduced punishment, except stating that he had a wife and children and they’re a poor family.

Source link

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here