Indian Penal Code, 1860
Sections 302, 364A, 201 read with Section 120B—Kidnaping and cold blooded murder—Imposition of fixed term sentence of 30 years without remission, by trial court, affirmed by High Court—Question of correctness of sentence—Reformative element acquires equal attention—Appellants share some commonalities: they were of young age at the time of offence, hail from educated backgrounds, and they continue to enjoy the love and affection of their families, each of which have a good standing and strong ties within the communities they live in—While the material relating to their lives and social conditions pre-conviction do not offer an explanation as to the cause for commission of offence, it can certainly be said that material available regarding their conduct post-conviction, remains encouraging—They have applied themselves during the time of incarceration and used their time to contribute meaningfully – for which they have each received commendations—Their psychological and psychiatric evaluations were concluded to be normal, without cause for concern—A strong case is made out in support of appellants’ probability of reform (as already evidenced by their jail conduct), and reintegration into society—State, too, has not indicated any material to the contrary, regarding this aspect—It would be appropriate to modify the sentence awarded to both appellants to a minimum term of 20 years actual imprisonment—Appeals partly allowed.
[Paras 28 & 29]
Sentence
Adequacy—Consideration—Wherever the prosecution is of the opinion that crime an accused is convicted for, is so grave that death sentence is warranted, it should carry out the exercise of placing the materials, in terms of Manoj v. State of Madhya Pradesh, [2022] 9 SCR 452 : (2023) 2 SCC 353 for evaluation—In case this results in imposition of death sentence, at the stage of confirmation, the High Court would have the benefit of independent evaluation of these materials—On the other hand, if death sentence is not imposed, then, the High Court may still be in a position to evaluate, if the sentence is adequate, and wherever appropriate and just, impose a special or fixed term sentence, in the course of an appeal by the state or by the complainant/informant—Given the imperative need for such material to form a part of the court’s consideration, it has to be emphasized that in case the trial court has failed to carry out such exercise (for whatever reason), the High Court has to call for such material while considering an appeal filed by the state or complainant for enhancement of sentence (whether resulting in imposition of capital punishment, or a term sentence).
[Para 22]
Power to impose special or fixed term sentences—Trial Courts are not empowered to impose such special sentences—Power to impose special or fixed term sentences (which may be longer than the minimum specified in HYPERLINK "https://indiankanoon.org/doc/237247/" Section 433A CrPC – i.e., may extend to considerably long periods, such as 30 years), with only the High Courts and the Apex Court. [Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, Section 433A]
[Para 21]