National   

Deal severely with crimes against women: Supreme Court

New Delhi: “Crimes of violence upon women need to be severely dealt with. The socio-economic status, religion, race, caste or creed of the accused or the victim is an irrelevant consideration in the sentencing policy,” the Supreme Court has held.

“Protection of society and deterring the criminal is the avowed object of law and that is required to be achieved by imposing an appropriate sentence. The courts are expected to consider all relevant facts and circumstances bearing on the question of sentence and proceed to impose a sentence commensurate with the gravity of the offence,” said a Bench comprising Justices Arijit Pasayat and P.P. Naolekar. “Undue sympathy to impose inadequate sentence would do more harm to the justice system to undermine the public confidence in the efficacy of law, and society could not long endure under such serious threats. It is, therefore, the duty of every court to award proper sentence having regard to the nature of the offence and the manner in which it was executed or committed.”

Pointing out that in practice, sentences imposed by the courts were largely determined by other considerations, the Bench said, “Inevitably these considerations cause a departure from just dessert as the basis of punishment and create cases of apparent injustice that are serious and widespread.”

It was setting aside a Karnataka High Court order, which reduced the seven-year jail term awarded by the trial court to Raju for raping a 10-year-old girl, to three-and-half years. But as the State had not sought enhancement of the sentence, the Bench restored the seven-year jail. Writing the judgment, Mr. Justice Pasayat said, “The measure of punishment in a case of rape cannot depend upon the social status of the victim or the accused. It must depend upon the conduct of the accused, the state and age of the sexually assaulted female and the gravity of the criminal act.”

The Bench said, “Courts must hear the loud cry for justice by society in cases of the heinous crime of rape on innocent, helpless girls of tender years, as in this case, and respond by imposition of proper sentence. Public abhorrence of the crime needs reflection through imposition of appropriate sentence by the court. To show mercy in the case of such a heinous crime would be a travesty of justice and the plea for leniency is wholly misplaced.”

The proportion between crime and punishment was a golden rule respected in principle.

“In spite of errant notions, it remains a strong influence in the determination of sentences. The practice of punishing all serious crimes with equal severity is now unknown in civilised societies, but such a radical departure from the principle of proportionality has disappeared from the law only in recent times. By deft modulation, the sentencing should be stern where it should be and tempered with mercy where it warrants to be.”

Printer friendly page  
Send this article to Friends by E-Mail

Stories in this Section

Affidavit not an inadvertent mistake, says BJP leader
Advani-Jayalalithaa meeting postponed
Deal severely with crimes against women: Supreme Court
A retrograde step, says Brinda Karat
Left receives reply on deal
Taj case verdict reserved
Narendra Modi’s birthday gift to tribals
PIL against caste column for admissions rejected
Anti-collision devices on BG network by 2014
Mamata to launch next phase of stir against Singur project

Copyright © 2007, The Hindu. Republication or redissemination of the contents of this screen are expressly prohibited without the written consent of The Hindu