SHAILESH JASVANTBHAI AND ANR. versus STATE OF GUJARAT AND ORS.

Citation: [2006] 1 S.C.R. 477 · Decided: 19-01-2006 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: ARIJIT PASAYAT · Disposal: Case Partly allowed

Cited by 4 judgment(s) · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

. , 
SHAILESH JASVANTBHAI AND ANR . 
A 
v. 
ST A TE OF GUJARAT AND ORS. 
JANUARY 19, 2006 
[ARIJIT PASAYAT AND S.H. Kft:PADIA, JJ.] 
B 
Penal Code, 1860; Ss. 307, 324, 504 rlw Section 114/Bombay Police 
Act, Section 135: 
Assault-Sentencing-Held: Protection of society and stamping out c 
criminal proclivity should be the object of law-Law should adopt the corrective 
machinery/deterrence based on factual matrix-Sentencing process be stern 
however mercy could be granted where it warranted undue sympathy to impose 
inadequate sentence would be harmful to the society and judicial system-
Though criminal law adheres in general to the principle of proportionality in D 
.\. 
prescribing liability in proportion to the culpability of the type of criminal 
\ 
conduct yet in practice sentences determined largely by other considerations-
Besides, disproportionate punishment has some very undesirable 
consequences-In awarding sentence aggravating and mitigating factors and 
circumstances in committing the crime need to be delicately balanced on the 
basis of relevant circumstan,ces-Facts and circumstances of the case, nature, E 
motive and manner of committing the crime, conduct of the accused and 
weapons used are relevant facts-High Court proceeded on factually erroneous 
premises without keeping in view correct principles relating to punishment-
Hence, the matter remitted to the High Court for hearing afresh on the question 
of sentence. 
F 
Accused persons quarreled with the appellants, the victims, on a 
trivial matter and after assaulting them fled. Both the victims were takP-n 
to the clinic of PW-I, a doctor, for treatment and First Information Report 
was lodged "'._ith the Police. Trial court conducted the trial of both the 
accused persons for alleged commission of offences punishable under G 
Sections 307, 324, 504 r/w Section 114 IPC and Section 135 of the Bombay 
~ 
Police Act and found both the accused guilty of committing offences under 
Sections 307 and 114 IP(: and sentenced them accordingly. On appeal, 
High Court while upholding the conviction reduced the sentence restricting 
it to the period already undergone as one of the accused persons had to 
477 
H 
478 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
(2006 J I S.C.R. 
A appear in the Board examination and had no criminal antecedent. Hence 
the present appeal. 
The appellants contended that no sympathy or leniency should have 
been shown to the accused persons; that the order was passed even without 
any notice to the injured persons/victim; that the factor which weighed 
B with the High Court that one of the accused persons was a student with 
no criminal antecedent had merely no relevance in determining the 
sentence; and that the accused persons were involved in a large number 
of criminal cases. 
c 
Partly allowing the appeals, the Court 
HELD: 1.1. The law regulates social interests, arbitrates conflicting 
claims and demands. Security of persons and property of the people is an 
essential function of the State. It could be achieved through instrumentality 
of criminal law. Undoubtedly, there is a cross cultural conflict where living 
law must find answer to the new challenges and the courts are required 
D to mould the sentencing system to meet the challenges. The contagion of 
lawlessness would undermine social order and lay it in ruins. Protection 
of society and stamping out criminal proclivity must be the object of law 
which must be achieved by imposing appropriate sentence. Therefore, law 
as a corner-stone of the edifice of "order" should meet the challenges 
E 
confronting the society. In operating the sentencing system, law should 
adopt the corrective machinery or the deterrence based on factual matrix. 
By deft modulation sentencing process be stern where it should be, and 
tempered with mercy where it warrants to be. The facts and given 
circumstances in each case, the nature of the crime, the manner in which 
it was planned and committed, the motive for commission of the crime, 
F the conduct of the accused, the nature of weapons used and all other 
attending circumstances are relevant facts which would enter into the area 
of consideration. [482-D-E-F-G] 
"law in Changing Society" by Friedman, referred to. 
1.2. Undue sympathy to impose inadequate sentence would do more 
G harm to the justice system to undermine the public confidence in the 
efficacy of law and society could not long endure under such serious 
threats. It is, therefore, the duty of every c

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