Summary
A father convicted of raping his nine-year-old daughter in August 2012 was sentenced by the trial court to life imprisonment with a rider that he be given no clemency for at least 20 years, which the High Court affirmed. Hearing the appeal on sentence alone, the Supreme Court held that a trial court has no power to impose such a fixed minimum term, that power belonging only to the High Courts and the Supreme Court; it further held that special category sentencing of life imprisonment with a fixed term beyond 14 years is available to constitutional courts even where the maximum punishment is life imprisonment and death is not prescribed, and itself directed that the appellant serve a minimum of 20 years of actual incarceration before seeking remission.
Issues
- Whether a Sessions Court can impose a sentence of life imprisonment with a direction that the convict receive no remission or clemency for a minimum fixed term.
- Whether mere affirmation by the High Court of such a direction amounts to an independent exercise of the High Court's own power of special category sentencing.
- Whether the power recognised in Swamy Shraddananda and V. Sriharan to impose life imprisonment for a fixed term exceeding 14 years, beyond remission, extends to offences for which the maximum punishment is life imprisonment and the death penalty is not prescribed.
- Whether the amended Sections 376(2)(f) and 376(3) IPC, prescribing life imprisonment for the remainder of natural life, can apply to an offence committed before 03.02.2013.
Provisions considered
- Section 376(2)(f) (as it stood before 03.02.2013) and Section 377, Indian Penal Code, 1860Rape of a girl under 12 was punishable with rigorous imprisonment of not less than 10 years extending to life, and unnatural offences with imprisonment for life or up to 10 years; the trial court sentenced the appellant to life under both. (¶ 6)
- Sections 45 and 53, Indian Penal Code, 1860Imprisonment for life means imprisonment for the rest of the convict's natural life, subject to remission under Articles 72 and 161 of the Constitution and Section 432 CrPC. (¶ 7)
- Sections 432, 433 and 433A, Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973In practice life imprisonment is often reduced to 14 years through remission and commutation, which may be grossly inadequate; a fixed-term sentence imposed by a constitutional court cannot be less than 14 years in view of Section 433A. (¶¶ 7, 8, 13, 15)
- Sections 376(2)(f), 376(3), 376A, 376AB, 376D, 376DA, 376DB and 376E, Indian Penal Code, 1860 (as amended by the Criminal Law (Amendment) Acts of 2013 and 2018)These now prescribe life imprisonment meaning the remainder of natural life for rape by a person in a position of trust or of a girl under 16, but being effective from 03.02.2013 they cannot apply to an offence committed in August 2012. (¶¶ 11, 12)
- Article 20(1), Constitution of IndiaNo person can be subjected to a penalty greater than that which could have been inflicted under the law in force when the offence was committed, so the enhanced post-2013 punishments were unavailable. (¶ 12)
Held
- Under V. Sriharan the power to impose a modified punishment of life imprisonment for a specified term exceeding 14 years, beyond the reach of remission, can be exercised only by the High Court or the Supreme Court; the Additional Sessions Judge's direction that the appellant receive no clemency for 20 years was therefore without legal basis. (¶¶ 9, 10)
- Mere affirmation by the High Court of a trial court's direction that it had no power to make is not an independent exercise of the High Court's own power of special category sentencing and does not cure the defect. (¶ 10)
- Although Swamy Shraddananda and V. Sriharan arose in the context of commuted death sentences, their reasoning that a 14-year life term may amount to no punishment at all applies to all life sentences; following Gouri Shankar and Shiva Kumar, the High Courts and the Supreme Court may impose a fixed-term life sentence exceeding 14 years even where the maximum punishment prescribed is life imprisonment with nothing further. (¶¶ 13, 14, 15)
- Such power must be confined to grave cases where release after 14 years would trivialise the punishment, must be supported by cogent reasons, and must not be exercised casually or for the mere asking. (¶ 15)
- The rape of his own young daughter is among the most monstrous of offences; the appellant's release after 14 years while the victim is still in her twenties could cause her further trauma, so this was a fit case for a modified sentence requiring a minimum of 20 years of actual incarceration before remission can be sought. (¶¶ 11, 16, 17)
Result
Appeal disposed of; the trial court's rider on clemency set aside as beyond its power, but the Supreme Court itself directs that the appellant's life imprisonment be for a minimum of 20 years of actual incarceration before he may seek remission under the CrPC or any other law; fines and default sentences confirmed.