INTRODUCTION:
The supreme court of India have recently acknowledged the judgment proposed by the Gujarat trial court imposing three years rigorous imprisonment for the rape convict under section 376 of Indian Penal code (IPC). This sentence propounded by the Gujarat high court is notably below the minimum imprisonment mentioned under the section 346 of the rape convicts that is minimum imprisonment of seven years, as mentioned prior to the 2013 amendment. The supreme court India further astonished by witnessing the negligence on the part of the Gujarat high court on rejecting the appeal filed by the appellant in addressing the sentence anomaly.
BACKGROUND:
According to the section 346 of IPC it mandates that the minimum sentence is seven years and maximum sentence is life imprisonment for offence of rape. The 2013 amendment to the IPC which enhanced the severity of the imprisonment for sexual offences. In the presence case, the trial court’s imposition of a three-year sentence is not abiding by the legal standards, which leads to supreme court to take cognizance for the adequacy of the punishment for the convict of rape under section 346 of IPC.
KEY POINTS:
Inadequacy of sentence: the supreme court astonished by witnessing the sentence passed by the trial court for the offence of rape for which IPC mandates the minimum of seven years sentence under section 346 of IPC.
Appeal in High courts: the supreme court of India noted that the Gujarat high court dismissed the appeal filed by the appellant not addressing the disproportionate sentence despite knowing the error in the trial court judgment.
Response of state: the Gujarat state counsel knowing the error made by the trial court and the negligence of the Gujarat high court have not taken any remedial steps to rectify the error and injustice occurred to the victim.
Supreme court cognizance: the supreme court of India took cognizance over the issues and scheduled the hearing on January 23,2025 to examine the issue further.
RECENT DEVELOPMENT
The intervention of the supreme court highlighted the due diligence of the lower courts mistake in adhere to the prescribed guidelines of the law especially in the cases which involves the serious crimes like rape under section 346 of IPC. The supreme court of India cognizance of the case ensured that whether justice is served equally and the Sentencing of the offence which reflects the gravity of the offence.
CONCLUSIONS:
This case highlights as the remainder to the judicial systems the importance of diligence in upholding the rule of law and ensuring that the sentence reflects the gravity of the offence. The supreme court of India cognizance of the case of trial court inadequate sentencing for three years under section 346 of IPC which mandates seven years of imprisonment.
“PRIME LEGAL is a full-service law firm that has won a National Award and has more than 20 years of experience in an array of sectors and practice areas. Prime legal falls into the category of best law firm, best lawyer, best family lawyer, best divorce lawyer, best divorce law firm, best criminal lawyer, best criminal law firm, best consumer lawyer, best civil lawyer.”
WRITTEN BY: MUTHULAKSHMI B
