Delve into the judicial interpretation of victims’ rights in seeking sentence enhancement in criminal cases as per the Code of Criminal Procedure. This summary focuses on the legal intricacies and the High Court’s perspective on the scope and limitations of victims’ appeals for sentence modifications. The court’s careful analysis provides insight into the legal framework governing such appeals and sets a precedent for future cases.
Facts
- The convict is sentenced to life imprisonment under Section 364A IPC and fined Rs. 1 lakh.
- In default of fine payment, he is to undergo simple imprisonment for five years, with all sentences running concurrently.
- He is also sentenced to seven years of rigorous imprisonment under the offence punishable by Section 201 IPC, with a fine of Rs. 50,000 imposed.
- The High Court of Delhi dismissed the appeal as not maintainable on 27 November 2019.
- The convict was sentenced for offences under Sections 302, 364A, and 201 IPC, with an additional order to undergo simple imprisonment for one year in default of fine payment.
- The appellant’s appeal seeking sentence enhancement was dismissed by the High Court under Section 372 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
- The appellant, who is the father of the deceased boy and complainant, filed an appeal challenging the sentence seeking enhancement to death penalty.
- The High Court directed the convict to receive life imprisonment under Section 302 IPC and pay a fine of Rs. 1 lakh.
- The criminal appeal is filed by the appellant against the High Court’s order dated 27 November 2019.
- Chargesheet filed against second respondent-accused under Sections 364A/302/201, IPC
Also Read: Transfer of Writ Petitions for Chartered Accountants’ Tax Audit Guidelines
Arguments
- Learned counsel for the appellant contends that the respondent no.2 committed murder of an innocent child and should be awarded death penalty instead of life imprisonment.
- Argument made regarding the proviso to Section 372, Cr.PC giving right to the victim to appeal for enhancement of sentence.
- The appellant’s counsel argues that the scope of appeal should not be restricted only to a lesser offence but should also include a lesser sentence.
- Request for enhancement of sentence from life imprisonment to death penalty for the second respondent.
- Submission that the High Court did not consider Section 372, Cr.PC properly and dismissed the appeal without due consideration of the relevant judgments.
- Incident involving the kidnapping and brutal murder of the appellant’s son on 15.10.2007.
- An appeal under Section 372 of Cr.PC by the victim is qualified and maintainable only in specific circumstances – acquittal of the accused, convicting for a lesser offense, or imposing inadequate compensation.
- The State Government, under Section 377 of Cr.PC, is empowered to appeal to the High Court in case of inadequate sentencing by the Sessions Court.
- Victims are not authorized to appeal for the enhancement of sentence under Section 372 of Cr.PC.
Also Read: Analyzing Interference with Acquittal in Legal Conviction Case
Analysis
- The proviso to Section 372 of the Code of Criminal Procedure was inserted by Act 5 of 2009.
- The appeal seeking enhancement of sentence at the instance of the victim is not maintainable unless provided for under the Code of Criminal Procedure or any other law in force.
- The appeal remedy is a creation of the Statute.
- No appeal shall lie from any judgment or order of a Criminal Court except as provided for by this Code or by any other law for the time being in force
- Victim has the right to prefer an appeal in three specific eventualities: acquittal of the accused, conviction for a lesser offense, or imposition of inadequate compensation
- Opportunity for the victim to appeal for inadequate compensation, but not for questioning the sentence as inadequate
- State Government can appeal for enhancement of sentence under Section 377, Cr.PC, but victim cannot appeal for inadequate sentence under Section 372, Cr.PC
- The High Court referred to the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of National Commission for Women v. State of Delhi & Anr. (2010) 12 SCC 599.
- Based on this reference, the High Court dismissed the appeal, deeming it as not maintainable.
Also Read: Judicial Review on Sentence and Compensation in Criminal Case
Decision
- No merit found in the appeal to interfere with the impugned order passed by the High Court
- The appeal is dismissed
Case Title: PARVINDER KANSAL Vs. THE STATE OF NCT OF DELHI (2020 INSC 515)
Case Number: Crl.A. No.-000555-000555 / 2020
