STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH versus SURENDRA SINGH

Citation: [2014] 13 S.C.R. 554 · Decided: 13-11-2014 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: M.Y. EQBAL · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed
Cited by 2 judgment(s) · see the full citation network in Lexace
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case
Judgment (excerpt)

A 
B 
[2014] 13 S.C.R. 554 
STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH 
v. 
SURENDRA SINGH 
(Criminal Appeal No. 2401 of 2014) 
NOVEMBER 13, 2014 
[M. Y. EQBAL AND SHIVA KIRTI SINGH, JJ.] 
c 
Sentencing/Sentencing policy - Duty of the courts to 
consider al/relevant factors to impose appropriate sentence 
-Accident caused by jeep due to rash and negligent driving 
bydriverofthejeep (respondent) leading to death of a person 
travelling in the jeep - Conviction of respondent by trial court 
D - Revision petition - High Court maintained conviction but 
reduced sentence awarded by trial court to the period already 
undergone - Propriety- Held: On facts, the trial court did not 
commit any illegality in passing the order of conviction -
However, without proper appreciation of the evidence and 
E consideration of gravity of the offence, the High Court showed 
undue sympathy by modifying the conviction to the period 
already undergone - Penal Code, 1860- ss.279, 337 and 
304-A. 
F 
Allowing the appeal, the Court 
HELD: Undue sympathy to impose inadequate 
sentence would do more harm to the justice system to 
undermine the public confidence in the efficacy of law. It 
G is the duty of every court to award proper sentence 
having regard to the nature of the offence and the 
manner in which it was executed or committed. The 
sentencing courts are expected to consider all relevant 
facts and circumstances bearing on the question of 
H 
554 
STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH v. SURENDRASINGH 
555 
sentence and proceed to impose a sentence A 
commensurate with the gravity of the offence. The court 
must not only keep in view the rights of the victim of the 
crime but also the society at large while considering the 
imposition of appropriate punishment. Meagre sentence 
imposed solely on account of lapse of time without B 
considering the degree of the offence will be counter-
productive in the long run and against the interest of the 
society. It is solemn duty of the court to strike a proper 
balance while awarding the sentence as awarding lesser 
sentence encourages any criminal and, as a result of the C 
same, the society suffers. The impugned order of the 
High Court reducing the sentence to the period already 
undergone is set aside and, to avoid miscarriage of 
justice, the sentence imposed by the trial court is 0 
restored. [Paras 14, 15 and 16][563-B-E; G-H; 564-A-B] 
Sevaka Perumal v. State of Tamil Nadu (1991) 3 
SCC 471 : 1991 (2) SCR 711; Dhananjoy 
Chatterjee @ Dharia v. State of West Bengal 
(1994) 2 SCC 220: 1994 (1) SCR 37; Mahesh 
and others v. State of Madhya Pradesh (1987) 3 
SCC 80 : 1987 (2) SCR 710; Hazara Singh v. 
Raj Kumar(2013) 9 SCC 516: 2013 (5) SCR 979; 
Shailesh Jasvantbhai v. State of Gujarat (2006) 2 
SCC 359 : 2006 (1) SCR 477; Ahmed Hussein 
Va/i Mohammed Saiyed v. State of Gujarat (2009) 
7 sec 254 : 2009 (8) SCR 719 and State of 
Madhya Pradesh v. Bab/u, 2014 (9) SCALE 678 
-relied on. 
Case Law Reference: 
1991 (2) SCR 711 
1994 (1) SCR 37 
relied on 
relied on 
Para 8 
Para 9 
E 
F 
G 
H 
556 
A 
B 
c 
D 
E 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[2014] 13 S.C.R. 
1987 (2) SCR 710 
relied on 
Para 9 
2013 (5) SCR 979 
relied on 
Para 10 
2006 (1) SCR 477 
relied on 
Para 11 
2009 (8) SCR 719 
relied on 
Para 12 
2014 (9) SCALE 678 relied on 
Para 13 
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION· Criminal 
Appeal No. 2401 of 2014. 
From the Judgment and Order dated 22-08-2012 of the 
High Court of Madhya Pradesh Bench at Gwalior in Criminal 
Revision No. 03 of 2008. 
C.D. Singh,Annirudh Sharma,Advs. fortheAppellant. 
Prashant Shukla, Nikilesh Ramachandran,Advs. for the 
Respondent. 
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by 
M. Y. EQBAL, J. 1. Leave granted. 
2. State of Madhya Pradesh has preferred this appeal 
by special leave against the judgment and order dated . 
22.8.2012 passed by learned Single Judge of High Court of 
F Madhya Pradesh, Bench at Gwalior, who allowed the appeal, 
preferred by the respondent-accused, in part maintaining his 
conviction but reducing the sentence awarded by the trial court 
to the period already undergone subject to depositing further 
compensation of Rs.2,000/- to the widow/mother of the 
G deceased. 
H 
3. The prosecution case, in brief, is that on 11.5.1998 a 
ward boy of Sabalgarh Hospital lodged a written report at 
Sabalgarh police station to the effect that one Vijay Singh of 
STATE OF MADHYAPRADESHv. SURENDRASINGH 
557 
[M. Y. EQBAL, J.] 
village Mangroli died in accident caused by a jeep bearing A 
regis
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.