Supreme Court: Taking note of the heinous offences being committed in the society which not only shock the community but also the conscience of the Courts and Community coupled with extreme revulsion, the Court advanced the suggestions of Dr. V. S. Malimath in the 2003 report on “Committee of Reforms of Criminal Justice System”, of amending Section 53 of the Indian Penal Code by introducing one more category of punishment i.e. life imprisonment without commutation or remission. Tagging offences like rape and murder of a child as part of the ‘rarest of rare category’, the division bench of Hon’ble Chandramauli K. Prasad and Kurian Joseph, JJ. held that if Parliament has mandated a minimum sentence for certain offences, the Government being its delegate, cannot interfere with the same in exercise of their power for remission or commutation. The Court also said that wherever the Indian Penal Code or such penal statutes have provided for a minimum sentence for any offence, to that extent, the power of remission or commutation has to be read as restricted; otherwise the whole purpose of punishment will be defeated and it will be a mockery on sentencing. In the present case, the High Court of Rajasthan had commuted the death sentence imposed upon the accused who had raped a 5 year old child and after brutally murdering her, he had packed the dead body in a sack and further in a bag and secretly left it in a train. [State of Rajasthan v. Jamil Khan, Criminal Appeal No. 659 of 2006, decided on September 27, 2013] - Ref: SCC
Posted on: Wed, 02 Oct 2013 06:48:06 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015