LexSTATE OF HARYANA versus JANAK SINGH & ETC.
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
A B [2013] 5 S.C.R. 1144 STATE OF HARYANA v. JANAK SINGH & ETC. (Criminal Appeal Nos. 792-793 of 2013) MAY 10, 2013 [G.S. SINGHVI AND RANJANA PRAKASH DESAI, JJ.) Crime Against Women - Rape - Held: Rape is one of the most heinous crimes against women, which violates her C right to life guaranteed under Article 21 of the constitution - Constitution of India, 1950 - Article 21. D Bodhisattwa Gautam vs. Subhra Chakraborty (1996) 1 sec 490:1995 (6) Suppl. SCR 731 - relied on. Sentence/Sentencing - Rape case - Punishment for - High Court in appeal, maintaining the conviction of the accused persons, but reduced the sentence of imprisonment of accused No. 1 from 8 years to already undergone(i.e. more than 2 years) and of accused No. 2 from 4 years to already E undergone (i.e. 1year10 months and 7 days) - On appeal, held: Sentence bargaining is impermissible in a serious office like rape - Minimum sentence for rape is 7 years as provided uls 376(1) /PC - The minimum sentence can be reduced only after assigning adequate and special reasons - The reasons F must contain extenuating circumstances which prompted the court to reduce the sentence below the prescribed minimum - The courts are required to strictly abide by this legislative command - In the instant case, High Court heard the appeals in slipshod manner - Even if the accused did not press the G appeals, it was the duty of the High Court to consider the propriety of conviction - The High Court could have reduced the sentence below the minimum prescribed under the Jaw only when it gave reasons containing extenuating H 1144 STATE OF HARYANA v. JANAK SINGH 1145 circumstance - High Court did not give any reason for A reducing the sentence and such a course is against the mandate of s. 376(1) /PC, hence legally unsustainable - Matter remanded to High Court for disposal afresh - Penal Code, 1860 - s.376(1). B State of Karnataka vs. Krishnappa (2000) 4 SCC 75: 2000 (2) SCR 761; State of A.P. vs. Bodem Sundara Rao(1995) 6 sec 230: 1995 (4) Suppl. SCR 48 - relied on. Case Law. Referenc'e: 1995 (6) Suppl. SCR 731 relied on 2000 (2) SCR 761 relied on 1995 (4) Suppl. SCR 48 relied on Para 6 Para 8 Para 9 c CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Criminal Appeal D No. 792-793 of 2013. From the Judgment and Order dated 02,08.2010 of the High Court of Judicature at Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh in Criminal Appeal No. 648-SB & 811-SB of 2000. E Narender Hooda, Sr. AAG, Dr Monika Gusain for the Appellant. Kapil Arora, Dharitry Phookan, Vikrant Rana for the Respondents. F The order of the Court was delivered by (SMT.) RANJANA PRAKASH DESAI, J. 1. Leave granted. G 2. In these appeals by special leave the State of Haryana has challenged the judgment and order dated 2/8/2010 passed by the High Court of Punjab & Haryana maintaining the conviction of respondent Joginder Singh (original accused 1) under Sections 376 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code (for short, H 1146 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2013] 5 S.C.R. A 'the IPC' ) and conviction of respondent Janak Singh (original accused 2) under Sections 376 read with Section 511 and Section 506 of the IPC and reducing their sentence for the said offences to the sentence already undergone by them. 8 3. According to the prosecution the prosecutrix lodged an FIR on 31/10/1998 at Police Post Jalmana stating that she was residing in the dera of Shekhupura along with her brother Gurpreet Singh and mother Joginder Kaur. On 27/10/1998 she, her mother Joginder Kaur and brother Gurpreet Singh were C sleeping in the dera. At about 11.00 p.m. she got up for easing herself. After unbolting the room she went to the courtyard. She found that two men i.e. respondent Joginder Singh and respondent Janak Singh were standing near the boundary of the courtyard. One of them was having a khes and another was having a piece of cloth on his head. They lifted her and D threatened to kill her in case she raised cries. They took her to a field of maize where respondent Joginder Singh raped her. Respondent Janak Singh also tried to catch hold of her to rape her, but, since she cried for help her mother Joginder Kaur came there and on seeing her both the accused fled away E towards the fields. On the basis of this FIR, offences under Sections 376/506/511 of the IPC were registered against both the respondents. Investigation commenced. On completion of investigation, respondent Joginder S
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.