Summary
A company cab driver in Bengaluru who, in 2005, induced a 28-year-old employee leaving work at night to travel in his vehicle, then raped and murdered her, was convicted under Sections 366, 376 and 302 IPC and sentenced to imprisonment for the rest of his life, which the Karnataka High Court upheld while dismissing the State's appeal for enhancement. On his appeal limited to sentence, he argued that under the Constitution Bench in V. Sriharan a fixed-term life sentence may be imposed by constitutional courts only as a substitute for the death penalty. The Supreme Court rejected that reading, holding that the High Court and Supreme Court may impose a fixed-term sentence beyond the reach of remission even where death is neither imposed nor proposed, though a trial court cannot, and directed release only after thirty years of actual imprisonment.
Issues
- Whether a constitutional court may impose a modified or fixed-term life sentence, excluding statutory remission for a specified period, in a case where the death penalty has not been imposed or proposed.
Provisions considered
- Sections 53 and 45; Sections 302, 366 and 376, Indian Penal Code, 1860Imprisonment for life means imprisonment for the rest of the convict's life subject to remission; when a court directs that the convict shall not be released for a specified period the sentence becomes a modified punishment during which remission under the CrPC cannot be granted. The convict was sentenced to life for murder with the direction to serve thirty years. (¶¶ 7, 10, 13, 17)
- Section 433A, Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973A fixed-term sentence imposed as a modified punishment cannot be for less than fourteen years. (¶ 13)
Held
- The Constitution Bench in V. Sriharan held that the power derived from the Penal Code to impose a modified punishment, for a specific term or till the end of life, can be exercised only by the High Court and the Supreme Court and not by any inferior court; that holding cannot be read narrowly as confining the power to cases of commutation of the death sentence. Where a constitutional court finds that a case is not the rarest of rare but the gravity of the offence and other relevant factors so warrant, it may impose a fixed term of more than fourteen years so that statutory remission is not available. (¶¶ 10, 11, 12, 13)
- The trial court could not itself have directed that the convict not be released for life, and the absence of antecedents is not by itself a consideration for deciding whether a case is the rarest of rare. Given the brutal rape and murder of a young woman working night shifts in an IT company, the safety of women in such employment, the public confidence in the legal system and the rights of the victim, undue leniency is unwarranted and a fixed-term sentence of thirty years is called for. (¶¶ 14, 15, 16)
Result
Appeal partly allowed; sentence for the offence under Section 302 IPC modified to imprisonment for life with the direction that the appellant be released only after completing thirty years of actual sentence; convictions under Sections 366, 376 and 302 IPC undisturbed.