LexNATIONAL COMMISSION OF WOMEN versus STATE OF DELHI & ANR.
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
[2010] 10 S.C.R. 905 NATIONAL COMMISSION OF WOMEN v. STATE OF DELHI & ANR. (Special Leave Petition (Criminal) No. 2506 of 2009) JULY 23, 2010 [HARJIT SINGH BEDI AND CHANDRAMAULI KR. PRASAD, JJ.] Penal Code, 1860: . A B c s. 376 - A girl of 21 years subjected to sexual intercourse with the false promise of marriage - The girl committed suicide - Trial court convicting the accused u/s 306 with 10 years RI and uls 376 with life imprisonment - Acquittal by High Court as regards offence punishable uls 306 and reduction 0 of sentence u/s 376 to the period already undergone viz. about. 5 years and six months - Special .leave petition filed by National Commission for Women challenging reduction of sentence u/s 376 - HELD: Sub-s.(1) of s.376 provides for imposition of a sentence of upto ten years or life but the E proviso says that the court may for adequate and special reasons, impose a lesser sentence - The discretion exercised by a court, particularly a superior court, should not be lightly interfered with - Several factors had been taken into account by the High Court while imposing a lesser sentence and it would be improper for Supreme Court to interfere with the High F Court's discretion on the quantum of sentence except in extraordinary circumstances - There is no such circumstance - Sentence/Sentencing - Constitution of India, 1950 - Article 136 - Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 - s.377. CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE, 1973: s. 377 - Appeal against sentence on the ground of its. inadequacy - National Commission for Women filing SLP 905 G H 906 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2010] 10 S.C.R. A before Supreme Court challenging the judgment of High Court by which it reduced the sentence u/s 376 /PC from life imprisonment to the period already undergone viz. 5 years and six months - HELD: Section 377 specifically provides that it is the State Government or the Central Government B which can issue a direction to the Public Prosecutor to present an appeal before the Court of Session or the High Court on the ground of inadequacy of the sentence - This section does not in any manner authorise an appeal to the Supreme Court - Therefore, the Commission was not entitled to maintain an c appeal in the Supreme Court against the order of the High Court - Penal Code, 1860 - s.376 - Constitution of India, 1950 - Article 136. D Constitution of India, 1950: Article 136 - Permission to file special leave petition - Revocation of - National Commission for Women filing special leave petition with permission to file the SLP - Challenging judgment of High Court reducing the sentence of life imprisonment uls 376 /PC awarded by trial court to the E period already undergone which was about five years and six months - HELD: An appeal is the creature of a Statute and cannot lie under any inherent power - Supreme Coult does undoubtedly grant leave to appeal under the discretionary power conferred under Article 136, at the behest of the State F or an affected private individual but to permit anybody or an organization pro-bono publico to file an appeal would cause utter confusion in criminal justice system - While an appeal by a private individual can be entertained but it should be done sparingly and after due vigilance and, particularly, in a case where the remedy has been shut out for the victims due G to malafides on the part of the State functionaries or due to inability of the victims to approach the Court - In the instant case, neither the State which is the complainant nor the heirs of the deceased have chosen to file a petition in the High Court - As this responsibility has been taken up by the H NATIONAL COMMISSION OF WOMEN v. STATE OF 907 DELHI & ANR. Commission at its own volition, this is clearly not permissible A in the light of the judgments of this Court - Atjcordingly, Special Leave Petition is dismissed as· not mai~jfainable - Permission to file Special Leave Petition grant:ed by the Court's order dated 2.4.2009 is, accordingly, revoked -.Party - Penal Code, 1860 - s.376 - Code of Criminal Procedure, B . 1973 - s.377 - Administration of criminal justice. Pritam Singh vs. State AIR (37) 1950 SC 169; P.S.R. Sadhanantham vs. Arunachalam 1980 (2) SCR 873 = 1980 (3) sec 141 - relied on. Case Law Reference: c AIR (37) 1950 SC 169 relied on para 8 1980 (2) SCR 873 relied on para 8 CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: SLP (Criminal) D No. 2506 of 2009
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.