ASHOK KUMAR versus STATE (DELHI ADMJNISTRATION)

Citation: [1980] 2 S.C.R. 863 · Decided: 29-01-1980 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: V.R. KRISHNA IYER · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

Judgment (excerpt)

863 
ASHOK KUMAR 
v. 
STATE (DELHI ADMJNISTRATION) 
lanuary 29, 1980 
[V. R. KRISHNA IYER AND R. S. PATHAK, JJ.] 
Criminat trials-Sentence-Offender in his teens at the time of committing 
the offence-Age, if a mitigating circumstance. 
The appellant wtls co•victed and sentenced to two years' im.prisoE.ment and 
fine of Rs. 2,000 asd imprisoament for six months aad fiae of Rs. 500 for 
A 
B 
car ]ifting and scooter poaching. 
On the question of sentence. 
C 
Allowing the appeals, 
HELD : (a) The sentence of imprisonment is reduced to th.e extent of the 
period already undera;oae; but th0; se11.tences of fiae a11d tlle alternative period 
of imprisonment in case of default are maintained. [865 H] 
(b) The long protracted liticatioa fr•• 1971 oaward• is so- deterrent 
for a youag man in his 20s. The youthful age of the otfeader io a factor which 
deServe consideration.. A long period of in.carceration may brutalise a boy and 
blunt his finer sensibilities so 
th•t the 
elildwproduct may 
perhaps be aore 
criminal than the one at the point of entry. The ole•tler havi•g served a 
term of nearly six months must have realised that the gamo of crime does not 
pay. [864 D, 865 Cl 
( c) Payment of fine brings home the sense of 
respoll5ihility in a surer 
fashion than even shortwterms of imprisonment in some cases. [865 CJ 
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JUJUSDICTION : Criminal Appeal Nos. 66-67: 
of 19-80. 
D 
E 
Appeals by Special Leave from the Judgment and Order dated 
F 
30/8/1979 of the Delhi High Court in Criminal Revision Nos. 65-66 
Of 1979. 
N. S. Das Bahl for the Appellant. 
M. N. Shroff for the Respondent. 
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by 
G 
KRISHNA IYER, J.-The common appellant in both these appeals 
is a teen-aged student turned criminal adventurer in the elitist area of 
car-lifting and scooter-poaching current in our fashionable; cities, includ· 
ing Delhi. 
While he was a college student and but 19 years old, the 
appellant tried his hand at stealing a scooter way back in 1971. He 
H 
was arrested but bailed out and while on bail was accused of committing 
a car theft. 
Both these cases were tried and he was found guilty. 
The 
864 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[1980] 2 S.C.R, 
A 
scooter offence resulted in a sentence of two years' imprisonment and, a 
fine of Rs. 2,000. 
The car theft case got converted into an, offence 
under Section 411 I.P.C. and, consequently, a reduced sentence of 
imprisonment for six month~ and a fine of Rs. 500. 
The convictions being concurrenf and no substantial infirmity being 
B 
present, we have confined leave to appeal to the questiqn of sentence 
only. But sentencing-the cutting edge of the judicial process is the 
crucial strategy of the criminal law in achieving social defence and 
delinquent rehabilitation. 
Sd we have to consider tile totality of factors 
bearing on tile offence and the offender and fix a punishment which 
will promote effectively tile punitive objective of the Jaw--Oeterrence 
C 
and habilitation. 
D 
E 
IF 
B 
We do not deem it necessary to set out elaborately all the socio-
legal facts which have been discussed at the bar. 
All that ,'we 
need say is tllat tile offence took' place in 1971. and we are now in/ 
1980. A long protracted litigation is some deterrent for 3'. young man 
in his twenties. 
The accused was nineteen when the offences were 
committed and his youthful age is a factor which deserve& considera-
tion. 
A long period of incarceration in tile present condition of prisons 
may brutalise tile boy and blunt his finer sensibilities so that the end-
product may perhaps be more criminal than the one at the point of 
entry. Not tllat all prison terms are not deterrent but some cases prove 
to be counter productive especially when the delinquent is young. 
It may be interesting to recall Lord Soper's observations in the 
House of Lords in a debate on British Prisons, where he said : 
"Now as to reform. I was a prison chaplain for 30 
years. 
I cannot remember a single man who was reformed 
by being in prison-not one. 
I can remember tllose who, 
serving very short sentences, were for a 
time, 
perhaps, 
brought to recognise something of the gravity of what they 
had been doing; but I am completely convinced that the 
longer a man stays in: prison, :the longer' he stays in that kind 
of incarceration, the less is the prospect of reform and the 
more certain is the process< of decay. 
111at is why I have 
consistently tried to say that any man wh0i is i

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.