In a recent legal case concerning a murder conviction, the court delved into the nuances of sentencing, particularly focusing on the distinction between imprisonment for life and rigorous imprisonment for life. Building upon previous judgments, the court’s analysis offers valuable insights into the legal implications of such sentencing decisions.
Facts
- Notice issued on 24.08.2018 regarding the propriety of specifying rigorous imprisonment while imposing life sentence.
- Petitioner surrendered on 28.05.2020 and has served approximately nine years of the sentence till date.
- Petitioner’s appeal against conviction and sentence was dismissed by the High Court on 15.07.2016.
- The Government of Punjab commuted the death sentence to life imprisonment.
- An FIR was lodged on 19.03.2020 at Jogighopa Police Station under Section 224 IPC.
- The Petitioner is accused of killing his wife based on suspicion of her infidelity.
- The Petitioner has filed a Special Leave Petition (Crl.) No 7110 of 2018 challenging his conviction under Section 302 IPC.
- The Petitioner was released on annual leave for 30 days on 17.02.2020 but failed to surrender after the expiry of the leave on 18.03.2020.
Also Read: Legal Analysis on Seniority Fixation in Contempt Petitions
Arguments
- The Petitioner in SLP (Crl.) No.6220 of 2018 argued that the issue of rigorous imprisonment while convicting a person under Section 302 IPC is settled law as per the judgment in Naib Singh v. State of Punjab & Ors.
- The Petitioner in SLP Crl. No.7110 of 2018 attempted to distinguish the judgment in Naib Singh (supra) made by Mr. A. Sirajudeen.
- Mr. Debojit Borkakati, representing the State of Assam, relied on the judgment in Dilpesh Balchandra Panchal v. State of Gujarat to assert that the arguments raised in these cases have been previously considered and rejected by the Court.
Also Read: Analysis of Authorization and Limitation in Filing Section 7 Application
Analysis
- The law laid down in Naib Singh’s case was followed in three other judgments
- After serving a 22-year sentence, Naib Singh filed a Writ Petition under Article 32
- One of the arguments raised related to the differentiation between sentence of imprisonment for life and rigorous imprisonment for life
- Earlier judgments in Pandit Kishori Lal v. King Emperor and Gopal Vinayak Godse v. State of Maharashtra were considered in Naib Singh’s case
- The Court held that imprisonment for life is equivalent to rigorous imprisonment for life
- There is no need to re-examine the limited point for which notice was issued
- The Special Leave Petitions are dismissed
Also Read: Judicial Review of Selection Process for DGP Appointment
Case Title: MD. ALFAZ ALI Vs. THE STATE OF ASSAM (2021 INSC 480)
Case Number: SLP(Crl) No.-006220 / 2018
