Summary
The State challenged reduction of an attempt-to-murder sentence from three years’ rigorous imprisonment to 44 days already served. The Court held that passage of time and the offender’s age could not alone justify a disproportionate sentence while ignoring the life-threatening skull injury. It condoned the State’s delay and restored the three-year term. The separate challenge to another accused’s probation failed because the State had not appealed that trial-court relief before the High Court.
Issues
- Whether the High Court had justified reducing the attempt-to-murder sentence to the period already served.
- Whether the State could challenge the co-accused’s probation for the first time before the Supreme Court after not appealing it in the High Court.
Provisions considered
- Section 307, Indian Penal Code, 1860The serious hurt and statutory sentencing range reinforced the inadequacy of the High Court’s unexplained reduction; the trial court’s three-year term was restored. (¶¶ 6, 9-10, 12)
Held
- Sentencing requires reasoned consideration of the offence, offender and proportionality, including gravity, injuries, weapon and attendant aggravating and mitigating circumstances. A cursory reduction without those considerations was impermissible. (¶¶ 6.1, 7, 9-10)
- The grievous, life-threatening skull injury made the original three-year sentence already lenient. Absence of a statutory minimum did not permit arbitrary leniency, and elapsed time or advancing age alone could not justify reduction to 44 days. (¶ 9-10)
- On these facts, the unsustainable sentencing approach warranted consideration on merits despite the State’s 1,880-day delay. Resettlement and satisfactory subsequent conduct did not prevent condonation in this case. (¶ 8)
- The State had not challenged the trial court’s grant of probation to Mohan Lal before the High Court. His own unsuccessful appeal did not provide a proper basis for the State to raise that probation challenge for the first time here. (¶ 11-12)
Result
State appeal allowed as to Banwari Lal: the three-year rigorous-imprisonment sentence under Section 307 was restored, with surrender within four weeks to serve the remainder. The appeal against Mohan Lal was dismissed. The State’s filing delay was condoned.