PRANJAY PURUSHOTAMBHAI GORADIA vs THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

We have heard the learned counsel for the parties.

Leave granted.

Limited notice was issued in the Special Leave Petition wherein leave to appeal has been prayed for to challenge the judgment of the Bombay

High Court convicting the accused appellant for the Signature Not Verified Digitally signed by VINOD LAKHINA offence punishable under

Section 307 of the Date: 2018.01.16 17:40:28 IST Reason:

Indian Penal Code, 1860 (''IPC'' for short). Sentence of rigorous imprisonment for life and fine of Rs.2,00,000/- (Rupees two lakh) was imposed

on the accused appellant with the further direction that the fine amount, once recovered, will be paid to the victim.

There are materials on record to suggest that the victim refused to accept any compensation. Because of the injuries suffered by her at the hands

of the accused appellant, on account of a frustrated love affair, the victim has become a paraplegic.

Time and again this Court has emphasized the wide discretion that is vested in the courts in our country in the matter of imposition of sentence of

imprisonment. Section 307 IPC, under which the accused appellant has been sentenced, contemplates as under:

Attempt to murder.-

Whoever does any act with such intention or knowledge, and under such circumstances that, if he by that act caused death, he would be guilty of

murder, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to ten years, and shall also be liable to fine; and if

hurt is caused to any person by such act, the offender shall be liable either to imprisonment for life, or to such punishment as is hereinbefore

mentioned.''

The absence of any yardstick or principle for award of sentence is one of the thorny problems of Indian Criminal Jurisprudence and the issue, at

present, is left to the discretion of the Court to be exercised judiciously and reasonably having regard to the facts of a given case.

Adverting to the facts of the present case, undoubtedly, the ghastly incident for which the accused appellant has been found liable had rendered

the victim, a young girl, who was aged 18-19 years old at the time of the occurrence to a vegetative state.

There can be no debate on the question that the accused should be dealt with severely. At the same time, while determining the precise extent of

the severity with which the accused should be dealt with, the circumstances which surround the accused cannot be altogether lost sight of. The

accused appellant, in the present case, was merely 21 years old at the time of the incident which had occurred on 26th October, 1990. Though the

accused appellant remained on bail during the pendency of the trial, post conviction he has been in jail since the year 2006 and, presently, he has

served a term of over 12 years.

Taking into account the date of the incident which is almost two decades old; the age of the accused at the particular point of time (i.e. 21 years)

and the period of custody suffered (i.e. over 12 years) we are of the view that the ends of justice would be adequately met if the sentence of life

imprisonment is altered to one of period undergone by the accused till date. Additionally, we are of the view that a total amount of compensation of

Rs.10,00,000/- (Rupees ten lakh) [inclusive of Rs.2,00,000/- (Rupees two lakh) which was deposited before the High Court] shall be paid by the

accused appellant within six months of his release from prison. Such compensation will be paid to the victim or her family. The amount of Rs.10

lakh can also be paid by the accused appellant in suitable installments all of which installments will, however, stand paid within the time frame

indicated by the Court in the present order. It is open for the victim or her family to accept the aforesaid compensation. In the event of any refusal

it will be open for the learned trial Court to pass orders making available the said sum of Rs.10 lakhs to such social or charitable body as the

learned judge may deem fit and proper.

Consequently and in the light of the above while dismissing the appeal we alter the sentence imposed on the accused appellant in the above

terms and direct that he should be released from prison forthwith unless his custody is required in connection with any other case.

If the appellant for any reason fails to pay the compensation amount within the time frame fixed, the learned trial judge shall send a

communication to the said effect to the Registry of this Court whereafter orders as may be appropriate will be passed by this Court.

The appeal is disposed of in terms of the above.