LexSANJIV KUMAR @ GORA versus STATE OF PUNJAB
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
[2015) 3 S.C.R. 711 SANJIV KUMAR@ GORA v. STATE OF PUNJAB (Criminal Appeal No. 1424 of 2009 etc.) MARCH 19, 2015 [DIPAK MISRA AND PRAFULLA C. PANT, JJ.] A B c Penal code, 1860- ss. 395, 450 and 342 - Prosecution under- Of appellant-accused- Conviction affirmed by High Court reducing the sentence - On appeal, held: In view of the evidence on record the accused was rightly convicted - His sentence cannot be reduced to the period already D undergone on the ground that more than. 10 years have passed after the incident - Sentence/Sentencing. Sentence/Sentencing - Imposition of punishment - Principles to be followed by court- Discussed. E Dismissing the appeals, the Court HELD: 1. After re-assessing the entire evidence on record, no illegality is found to have been committed by the trial court in convicting the appellant-accused u/ F ss.450 and 342 IPC, which is rightly affirmed, with modification of sentence, by the High Court. [Para 13] [717-F-G] 2. It cannot be said that the conviction recorded G against the accused cannot be sustained, on the ground that Inspector 'G', who actually lodged FIR against the present complainant has not been punished'. 'G' was not the co-accused in the trial, nor this Court has made any H 711 712 SUPREME COURT REPORTS (2015) 3 S.C.R. A observation as to innocence of the appellant-accused. As such, the decision given by Supreme Court in Criminal Appeal filed by 'G' is of little help to the present appellant-accused. [Paras 10 and 11) [716-C-D; G-H] B 3. Sentencing for any offence has a social goal. In each case, facts and circumstances of that case are always required to be taken into consideration. For the purpose of just and proper punishment, not only the accused must be made to realize that the crime was C committed by him, but there should be proportionality between the offence committed and the penalty imposed. It is obligatory on the part of the Court to keep in mind the impact of the offence on the society, and its ramifications including the repercussion on the victim. D Therefore, the sentence against the appellant cannot be further reduced to the period already undergone, on the ground that more than 10 years have passed after the incident. [Paras 14 and 15] [717-H; 718-A, C-D] E F C. Muniappan and others vs. State of Tamil Nadu (2010) 9 SCC 567: 2010 (10) SCR 262; Shyam Narain vs. State (NCT of Delhi) (2013) 7 sec 77: 2013 (8 ) SCR 951 - referred to. 2010 (10) SCR 262 . 2013 (8) SCR 951 CASE LAW REFERENCE referred to . referred to. Para 14 Para 14 G CRIMINALAPPELLATE JURISDICTION: Criminal Appeal No. 1424 of 2009. From the Judgment and Order dated 08.11.2006 of the High Court of Punjab & Haryana at Chandigarh in Criminal H Appeal No. 1746-SB of2005. SANJIV KUMAR@ GORA v. STATE OF PUNJAB 713 WITH A Crl. A. No. 489 of 2015 K. G. Bhagat, Rahul Dagar, Ms. Divya Shukla, Dinesh Singh, Neha Jain, Debasis Misra, Nitin Sangra, Pragya Baghel, Nishant Bishnoi, Saurabh Ajay Gupta, Kuldip Singh B for the appearing parties. The Judgment of the Court was delivered by PRAFULLA C. PANT, J. 1. These appeals are directed against judgment and order dated 8.11.2006 passed by the c High Court of Punjab and Haryana in Criminal Appeal No. 17 46-SB/2005 whereby the appeal of Sanjiv Kumar@ Gora has been dismissed, thereby affirming conviction recorded by Sessions Judge, Kapurthala in Sessions Case No. 18 of 2003 under Sections 395, 450 and 342 of the Indian Penal Code D (IPC). However, the sentence has been reduced by the High Court from 10 years imprisonment to 3 years imprisonment with enhancement in the quantum of fine from Rs.2,000/- to Rs.1,00,000/- under Section 395 IPC, and from imprisonment of 7 years to imprisonment of 3 years with enhancement of E fine from Rs.1000/-to Rs. 20,000/-under Section 450 IPC, without interfering in the quantum of sentence awarded by the trial court in respect of offence punishable under Section 342 IPC. 2. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the papers on record. 3. Prosecution story, in brief, is that appellant Sanjiv Kumar F @ Gora was posted as Assistant Sub Inspector at ~olice Station, City Phagwara. On 23.02.2002 at about 7.30 p.rrr.; G he along with some others committed trespass in the premises of M/s. Wadhawan Forex (P) Ltd., and committed robbery of Indian Currency of Rs.6,64,576/- and foreign currency of value ofRs.13,44,500/-. PW
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.