LexSTATE THROUGH C.B.I., ANTI CORRUPTION BRANCH, CHANDIGARH versus SANJIV BHALLA & ANR.
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
A B [2014] 6 S.C.R. 1078 STATE THROUGH C.B.I., ANTI CORRUPTION BRANCH, CHANDIGARH v. SANJIV BHALLA & ANR. (Criminal Appeal Nos. 1338-1339 of 2014) JULY 4, 2014 [RANJANA PRAKASH DESAI AND MADAN B. LOKUR, JJ.] C Probation of Offenders Act, 1958: Held: A person convicted under the provisions of the PC Act cannot be granted benefit of release on probation of good conduct u/ s. 360 of the Code of Criminal Procedure or under the provisions of the Probation of Offenders Act, 1958 - Code of D Criminal Procedure, 1973 - s.360. Criminal jurisprudence: Sentence - Just sentencing - Held: Punishment should be rehabilitative and humanizing and need not necessarily be retributive in character - Judges E have to strike a fine balance between releasing a convict after admonition or on probation or putting such a convict in jail - Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 - ss.360, 361. Sentence/Sentencing: Plea bargaining - Held: There is necessity of giving justice to the victims of a crime and F awarding a just sentence to the convicts by treating them in a manner that tends to assist in their rehabilitation - The amendments brought about in the Criminal Procedure Code in 2006 also include a chapter on plea bargaining, which again is intended to assist and enable the Trial Judge to G arrive at a mutually satisfactory disposition of a criminal case by actively engaging the victim of a crime - It is the duty of a Trial Judge to utilize all these tools given by Parliament for ensuring a fair and just termination of a criminal case - For awarding a just sentence, the Trial Judge must consider the H 1078 STATE THROUGH C.8.1., ACB, CHANDIGARH v. 1079 SANJIV BHALLA provisions of the Probation of Offenders Act and the A provisions on probation in the Criminal Procedure Code - When it is not possible to release a convict on probation, the Trial Judge must record his or her reasons - The grant of compensation to the victim of a crime is equally a part of just sentencing - When it is not possible to grant compensation B to the victim of a crime, the Trial Judge must record his or her reasons - Trial Judge must always be alive to alternative methods of a mutually satisfactory disposition of a case - Compensation. The prosecution case that the four accused persons C entered into conspiracy to cheat the Insurance Company Ltd. One of the accused was posted as the Divisional Manager in the company and two accused were posted as Administrative Officer and surveyor. The three accused persons abused their official position as public D servant and made payment to the fourth accused on the basis of false claim made by him. The trial court convicted each of the accused under section 120-B rlw Section 420, IPC. Only one accused 'SPG' was convicted under Section 13(1)(d) rlw Section 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act. The accused challenged their convictions before the High Court. The accused who was convicted under Prevention of Corruption Act died during pendency of appeals. The accused persons restricted the appeals only to the quantum of sentence. The High Court observed that since the accused were facing mental agony of the trial and they had already suffered imprisonment for twenty days .duri'1g the trial after conviction they should be G released on sentence already undergone by them. The High Court observed that a lenient view in the matter of sentence should be taken and directed that conviction recorded against the accused under Section 120-B read with Section 420 of the IPC, S.ection 420 of the IPC and E F H 1080 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2014] 6 S.C.R. A Section 13(1)(d) read with Section 13(2) of the PC Act shall be maintained. However, it held that the accused persons shall be released on probation of good conduct under Section 4(i) of the Probation of offenders Act, 1958. 8 The CBI filed the instant appeals challenging the release of accused persons on probation of good conduct under the Probation of Offenders Act, 1958 alleging that it was impermissible in view of conviction under the PC Act. The accused who died during hearing C of appeal before the High Court was also made party respondents. D Dismissing the appeals, the Court Per (Smt.) Ranjana Prakash Desai, J. HELD: 1. Since only accused 'SPG' was convicted under the provisions of the PC Act, the High Court could not have observed that all the accused were convicted under the provisions of
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.