State of M.P. vs Bhagwat

Y.K. Sabharwal and P.P. Naolekar, JJ.—Leave granted.

The Respondent was convicted for offences under Sections 376(1), 342 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code. For the offence punishable u/s 376(1), I.P.C., he was sentenced for a period of ten years. Lesser punishments were inflicted for other offences. In appeal against the order of conviction and sentence, the sentence awarded has been reduced to the period already undergone, namely, four years and eight months, insofar as the offence of rape u/s 376(1), I.P.C. is concerned. The only reason given is that the accused is an illiterate labourer from rural area and, therefore, sentence of imprisonment deserves to be reduced to the period already undergone.

We are unable to sustain the view of learned single Judge of the High Court, acceptance whereof means that for a heinous crime like rape, there are different standards for illiterate labourers from rural areas. That cannot be the position in law. Having regard to the severity of the offence, Section 376(1), I.P.C. provides for a minimum sentence of seven years, and adequate and special reasons are required to be recorded in the judgment for imposing lesser punishments. By no stretch of imagination, the reasons recorded by the learned single Judge in the impugned judgment and order can be held to be adequate and special reasons within the meaning of Section 376(1), I.P.C. The Sessions Court, on consideration of the matter, had imposed sentence of ten years. Nothing has been shown so as to justify the reduction of sentence.

In this view, we set aside the impugned judgment and order of the High Court and restore that of the Sessions Court. The appeal is accordingly allowed. The Respondent shall be taken into custody to serve out the remaining period of sentence.