The Supreme Court of India has mandated that appellate courts convicting an accused for the first time must directly handle sentencing, ensuring a fair and comprehensive judicial process.
Key Points
- Supreme Court clarifies appellate courts must hear convicts on sentencing after reversing acquittal.
- The ruling emphasises Section 386(a) of the CrPC, ensuring appellate courts impose appropriate sentences.
- High Court's direction to trial judge for sentencing after conviction deemed inappropriate by Supreme Court.
- The Supreme Court sent a rape case back to Calcutta High Court for fresh consideration on sentencing.
The Supreme Court on Tuesday said an appellate court which convicts an accused in a criminal case for the first time has to hear him on sentence and cannot relegate the matter to a lower court.
Supreme Court's Directive on Sentencing
A bench of Justices K V Viswanathan and Vijay Bishnoi made the observation while sending a matter pertaining to conviction in a rape case back to the Calcutta High Court for fresh consideration.
"A court which convicts the accused for the first time has to hear the accused on sentence. If it is a trial court then Section 235(2), CrPC, will apply. If it is the appellate court which is convicting the accused for the first time after reversing the acquittal, the appellate court has to hear the convict on sentence.
"The appellate court cannot relegate the matter to the court below only for the purpose of imposing a sentence after the appellate court had recorded a conviction. That will be contrary to Section 386(a), CrPC, and the judgments of this court," the bench said.
Details of the Case
In this case, the high court after convicting the accused, instead of setting a date for hearing the accused on sentence, directed him to surrender before the trial judge.
It also directed that on his surrender the trial judge shall take him into custody and shall pronounce and impose the proper sentence under relevant sections of Indian Penal Code, after hearing on the point of sentence in accordance with law.
The top court said the appellate court should not send the matter to the trial court only for the purpose of imposing a sentence, after it finds accused guilty.
The apex court said it has a bounden duty to hear and impose an appropriate sentence.
