STATE OF PUNJAB versus PREM SAGAR & ORS.

Citation: [2008] 8 S.C.R. 574 · Decided: 13-05-2008 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: S.B. SINHA · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

Cited by 1 judgment(s) · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

[2008] 8 S.C.R. 574 
-i 
,,, 
A 
STATE OF PUNJAB 
v. 
PREM SAGAR & ORS. 
(Criminal Appeal No. 872 of 2008) 
B 
MAY 13, 208 
[S.B. SINHA AND V.S. SIRPURKAR, JJ.] 
Criminal Law: 
_., 
~ 
c 
Sentencing - HELD: Courts while imposing sentence 
must take into consideration the principles applicable thereto 
- In the instant casA, High Court did not rest its decisions on 
any legal principle - No sufficient and cogent reason was ar-
rived while giving the accused benefit of Probation of Offend-
ers Act- Sentence of one year imprisonment awarded by trial 
D court for commission of offence u/s 61(1) of Punjab Excise 
Act modified to six months imprisonment with a fine of Rs. 50001 
~ 
- - Punjab Excise Act, 1914 - s.61(1) - Probation of Offend-
ers Act, 1958- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 - ss. 235, 
248(2), 325, 360 and 361 - Constitution of India, 1950 - Ar-
E tic/es 47 and 136. 
-. 
The respondents were convicted by the trial court 
for commission of an offence uls 61(1) of the Punjab Ex-
cise Act, 1914 as they were caught unlawfully carrying 
F 
2000 litres of rectified spirit. The trial court sentenced them .\ 
to one year's imprisonment. The High Court, considering 
" 
the fact that the offence had been committed 19 years 
back, gave the accused benefit of Probation of Offenders 
Act, 1958. Aggrieved, the State filed the instant appeal. 
G 
Allowing the appeal, the Court 
HELD: 1.1 Courts while imposing sentence must take 
-t -
into consideration the principles applicable thereto. It 
requires application of mind. The purpose of imposition 
of sentence must also be kept in mind. [para 25) [589-F,G] 
H 
574 
• t 
STATE OF PUNJAB v. PREM SAGAR 
575 
& ORS. 
1.2 Whether the court while awarding a sentence A 
would take recourse to the principle of deterrence or re-
form or invoke the doctrine of proportionality, would no 
doubt depend upon the facts and circumstance of each 
case. While doing so, however, the nature of the offence 
said to have been committed by the accused plays an im-
B 
portant role. The offences which affect public health must 
be dealt with severely. For the said purpose, the courts 
must notice the object for enacting Article 47 of the Con-
stitution of India. [para 6-7] [578-C,D] 
1.3 Even while introducing the doctrine of plea bar-
C 
gaining in the Code of Criminal Procedure, certain types 
of offences were kept out of the purview thereof. While 
imposing sentences, the said principles should be borne 
in mind. [para 7] [578-E] 
1.4 The Parliament, in providing for a hearing on sen-
D 
tence, as would appear from Sub-section (2) of Section 
235, Sub-section (2) of Section 248, Section 325 as also 
Sections 360 and 361 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 
1973 has laid down certain principles. The said provisions 
lay down the principle that the court in awarding the sen-
E 
tence must take into consideration a large number of rel-
evant factors, sociological backdrop of the accused be-
ing one of them. [para 8] [578-F,G,H] 
1.5 Although a wide discretion has been conferred 
F 
upon the court, the same must be exercised judiciously. 
It would depend upon the circumstances in which the 
crime has been committed and the mental state of the . 
Age of the accused is also relevant. [para 8] [579-A] 
Dhananjoy Chatterjee Alias Dhana v. State of W B. (1994) G 
2 SCC 220; Gentela Vijayavardhan Rao and Another v. State 
of A.P [(1996) 6 SCC 241 - Shailesh Jasvantbhai and An-
other v. State of Gujarat and Others (2006) 2 SCC 359; Sevaka 
Perumal v State of TN. (19°91) 3 SCC 471; State of M.P v 
Bala @ Balaram, (2005) 8 SCC 1; State of M.P v. Govind, 
H 
STATE OF PUNJAB v. PREM SAGAR 
577 
. 
·~ 
& ORS. [S.B. SINHA, J] 
/ 
Mishra for the Appellant. 
A 
Dinesh Verma and Dr. Kai lash Chand for the Respondents. 
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by 
S.B. SINHA, J : 1. Leave granted. 
B 
• ,. 
2. In our judicial system, we have not been able to develop 
legal principles as regards sentencing. 
The superior courts except making observations with re-
gard to the purport and object for which punishment is imposed 
upon an offender, had not issued any guidelines. Other devel- c 
oped countries have done so. At some quarters, serious con-
cerns have been expressed in this behalf. Some Committees 
as for example Madhava Menon Committee and Malimath Com-
.... 
mittee have advocated introduction of sentencing guidelines . 
.... 
3. Before, however, we delve into the said question, we D 
may notice the fact of the

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