STATE OF KARNATAKA versus KRISHNAPPA

Citation: [2000] 2 S.C.R. 761 · Decided: 30-03-2000 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: A.S. ANAND · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

Cited by 5 judgment(s) · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

STATE OF KARNATAKA 
A 
v. 
KRISHNAPPA 
MARCH 30, 2000 
[DR. AS. ANAND, CJ.; R.C. LAHOTI AND S.N. VARIAVA, JJ.] 
B 
Indian Penal Code, 1860-Section 376(2)(Proviso)-Reduction in sen-
tence~Rape committed on an 8 year old girl-Trial Court convicted accused 
and sentenced him to undergo JO years RI and fine of Rs. 3000-High Court 
confinned conviction but reduced sentence to 4 years RI while maintaining 
sentence of fine~Lenient approach was adopted by High Court as the accused 
was old and had a dependant family to support, inspite of the fact that he was 
a chronic alcoholic and often misbehaved-On appeal, Held, nonnal sentence 
for rape on a child below 12 years is not less than JO years RI though it may 
be reduced for "special and adequate reasons"-Approach of High Courl was 
casual and inappropriate as no good reasons were given let alone "special 
and adequate reasons"-Conviction and sentence of fine maintained and 
sentence enhanced to 10 years. RI. 
Sentencing-Courls should deal with sexual crimes against woman with 
utmost sensitivity-Sentence should be commensurate with the gravity of the 
offence having regard to facts and circumstrances of the case-No leniency or 
mercy should be shown towards henious crime of rape. 
Worm and Phrses-" Special and adequate reasons"-Meaning of in the 
context of Indian Penal Code, 1860-Section 376. 
Respondent had raped an 8 years old girl in a state of intoxication 
after an unsuccessful attempt to molest her mother. Trial Court sentenced 
him to 10 years R.I. and a fine of Rs. 3000. High Courtin appeal confirmed 
the conviction maintaining the sentence of fine but reduced the sentence to 
4 years RI. It was of the view that although the respondent was chronic 
alchoholic he deserved leniency as he was old and had a dependent family 
to support. The State appealed to this Court against reduction in sentence. 
Allowing the appeal, this Court 
c 
D 
E 
F 
G 
HELD: 1.1. Section 376 IPC shows that the legislative mandate is to 
impose a sentence, for the offence of rape on a girJ under 12 years of age, 
H 
761 
A 
B 
c 
D 
E 
F 
G 
H 
762 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[2000] 2 S.C.R. 
for a term which shall not be less thatn 10 years, but, it may extend to life 
and also to fine. The proviso to Section 376(2) IPC lays down that the Court 
may, for adequate and special reasons to be mentioned in the judgment, 
impose sentence of imprisonment of either description for a term of less 
than 10 years. It is a fundamental rule of construction that a proviso must 
be considered with relation to the principal matter to which it stands as a 
proviso particularly in such like penal provisions. The Courts are obliged to 
respect the legislative mandate in the matter of awarding of sentence in all 
such cases. Recourse to the proviso can be had only for "special and 
adequate reasons" and not in a casual manner. Whether there exist any 
"special and adequate reasons" wculd depend upqn a variety of factors and 
the peculiar facts and circumstances of each case. No hard and fast rule can 
be laid down in that behalf for universal application. (768-F-H; 769-A-B] 
1..2. The approach of the High Court was most casual and inappro-
priate as no good reasons were given to reduce the sentence, let alone 
"special or adequate reasons". The High Court exhibited lack of sensitivity 
towards the victim of rape and the society by reducing the substantive 
sentence in the established facts and circumstances of the case. The Courts 
are expected to properly operate the sentencing system and to impose such 
sentence for a proved offence, which may serve as a deterrent for the 
commission of like offences by others. (769-B-C] 
State of A.P. v. Bodem Sundara Rao, (1995)6 SCC 230, relied on. 
2.1. Sexual violence apart being a dehumanising act is an unlawful 
intrusion of the right to privacy and sanctity of a female. It is a serious 
below to her supreme honour and offends herself esteem and dignity -
it 
degrades and humiliates the victim and where the victim is a helpless 
innocent child, it leaves behind a traumatic experience. Courts are ex-
pected to deal with cases of sexual crime against women with utmost 
sensitivity. Such cases need to be dealt with sternly and severely. The 
measures of punishment in a case of rape cannot depend upon the social 
status of the victim or the accused. It must depend upon the conduct of the 
accused, the state and age of the sexually assaulted female and the gravity 
of the cr

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