STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH versus UDHAM AND OTHERS

Citation: [2019] 13 S.C.R. 976 · Decided: 22-10-2019 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: N.V. RAMANA · Disposal: Case Partly allowed

Judgment (excerpt)

A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
976
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2019] 13 S.C.R.
STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH
v.
UDHAM AND OTHERS
(Criminal Appeal No. 690 of 2014)
OCTOBER 22, 2019
[N. V. RAMANA, MOHAN M. SHANTANAGOUDAR
AND AJAY RASTOGI, JJ.]
Sentencing – Tests for – Complainant lodged report that
respondents-accused entered his house, attacked him and the others
present with axes and sticks resulting in various injuries –
Respondents then allegedly threatened the complainant that if he
did not keep his cow confined, he would be killed – Respondents
were convicted u/s.326 r/w s.34, IPC & s.452, IPC and sentenced
to 3 years rigorous imprisonment u/s.326 r/w s.34 – They were also
sentenced rigorous imprisonment for 1 year for the offence u/s.452,
IPC – High Court partly allowed the appeal and reduced the
sentence to the period of imprisonment already undergone (4
days),while enhancing the fine amount by Rs.1500/- each – On
appeal, held: In the present case, there is no detailed analysis of
the facts of the case, nature of the injuries caused, weapons used,
number of victims, etc. given by the High Court in the impugned
order – While sentencing the accused, it did not consider the second
charge proved against the respondents u/s.452, IPC – Even the fact
that the respondents had only undergone sentence of 4 days at the
time of passing of the impugned order, brings into question the High
Court pointing the same as reason for reducing their sentence –
Sentencing for crimes has to be analyzed on the touch stone of
three tests viz., crime test, criminal test and comparative
proportionality test – Facts of the case need to be balanced with
the fact that this was the first offence committed by the respondents
and the motive, which is stated to be trivial – Occurrence of the
crime is of 2008 and the respondents were only ordered to undergo
4 days of jail term with fine of Rs.1,500/- – Same needs to be
enhanced to commensurate with the guilt of the respondents – For
offence u/s.326, IPC r/with s.34, IPC, the respondent nos.1-3 to
serve rigorous imprisonment for 3 months and pay fine of
 [2019] 13 S.C.R. 976
976
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
977
Rs. 75,000/- each, within 1 month – For the offence u/s.452, IPC,
they are to serve rigorous imprisonment for 3 months and pay fine
of Rs. 25,000/- each, within 1 month– On default of payment of
fine, to suffer simple imprisonment for 3 months – For offence u/
s.326, IPC r/w s.34, IPC, the respondent no.4, aged around 80 years,
to serve rigorous imprisonment for 2 months and pay fine of
Rs.50,000/- within 1 month – For offence u/s.452, IPC, he is to
serve rigorous imprisonment for 2 months and pay fine of Rs.15,000/
- within 1 month – On default of payment of fine, to suffer simple
imprisonment for 1 month – Sentences to run concurrently –
Respondents be taken into custody forthwith, to serve their remaining
sentence – Penal Code, 1860 – s.326 r/w ss.34, 452.
Partly allowing the appeal, the Court
HELD: 1.1 In the present case, it is clear that there is no
detailed analysis of the facts of the case, the nature of the injuries
caused, the weapons used, the number of victims, etc. given by
the High Court in the impugned order. The High Court while
sentencing the accused, has not taken into consideration the
second charge proved against the respondents-accused herein,
under Section 452 of IPC. Even the fact that the respondents-
accused had only undergone sentence of 4 days at the time of
passing of the impugned order, brings into question the High
Court pointing to the same as a reason for reducing their
sentence. Sentencing for crimes has to be analyzed on the touch
stone of three tests viz., crime test, criminal test and comparative
proportionality test. Crime test involves factors like extent of
planning, choice of weapon, modus of crime, disposal modus (if
any), role of the accused, anti-social or abhorrent character of
the crime, state of victim. Criminal test involves assessment of
factors such as age of the criminal, gender of the criminal,
economic conditions or social background of the criminal,
motivation for crime, availability of defense, state of mind,
instigation by the deceased or any one from the deceased group,
adequately represented in the trial, disagreement by a judge in
the appeal process, repentance, possibility of reformation, prior
criminal record (not to take pending cases) and any other relevant
factor (not an exhaustive list). Under the crime test, seriousness
needs to be ascertained. The seriousness of t

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