1

PAPERONTHETOPICOFSUSPENSIONOFSENTENCEBYTHETRIAL
COURTANDSENTENCINGPOLICY

PartI
SuspensionofSentencebytheTrialCourt
Suspensionmeaning
1] Suspensionmeanstotakeorwithdrawthesentenceforthe
timebeing.Itisanactofkeepingthesentenceinabeyanceatthepleasure
of the person who is authorised to suspend the sentence, and if no
conditionsareimposed,thepersonauthorisedtosuspendthesentencehas
the right to have the offender rearrested and direct that he should
undergo the rest of the sentence without assigning any reason. This
positionisgivenintheLawCommission41 stReportP.281para29.1;and
alsoincaseslikeAshokKumarv.UnionofIndia[AIR1991SC1792];
StateofPunjabv.JoginderSingh[AIR1990SC1396]

2] Section 389 (1) and (2) of Cr.P.C. deals with a situation

whereconvictedpersoncangetaBailfromappellatecourtafterfilingthe
criminal appeal.Section 389(3)dealswith a situation where the trial
courtitselfcangrantabailtoconvictedaccusedenablinghimtopreferan
appeal. Since we are concerned with the power of the trial Court to
suspendthesentence,section389(3)mustbetakenintoaccount.

Section389(3)isapplicableonlyinthefollowingconditions
1. TheCourtmustbetheconvictingCourt,
2. TheaccusedmustbeconvictedbytheCourt,
3. Theconvictmustbesentencedtoimprisonmentforaterm
NOTexceedingthreeyears,
4. Theconvictmustexpresshisintenttopresentappealbefore
theappellateCourt,
5. Theconvictmustbeonbailonthedayofthejudgment,
 2

6. There should be right of appeal [Mayuram Subramanian

SrinivasanvsC.B.I((2006)5SCC752)].

TrialCourt'sPowersu/s389(3)ofCr.P.C.
1. TrialCourthaspowertoreleasesuchconvictonbail,
2. TrialCourthaspowertorefusethebailiftherearespecial
reasons,
3. TrialCourthaspowertoreleasesuchconvictforsuchperiod
aswillaffordsufficienttimetopresenttheappealandobtain
theordersoftheAppellateCourt

3] Thereafter,itisprovidedthatthesentenceofimprisonment
shall,solongasheissoreleasedonbail,bedeemedtobesuspended.So
whatisimportanttotakenoteof,isthatfirsttheTrialCourthastodecide
whethertherearespecialreasonstorefusethebail.IfthetrialCourtdoes
notfindanyspecialreasonsforrejectionofthebail,thentheconvicthas
tobereleasedonbailforenablinghimtopresentappealtotheappellate
Court.

Featuresofsection389(3)
1. Theconvictshallnotbereleasedonbailasofrightbuthe
willhavetosatisfythatheiseligibletobereleasedonbail;
2. IfthetrialCourtissatisfiedthattherearespecialreasonsfor
notreleasingtheconvictonbail,thentheTrialCourtcanvery
welldo;
3. Thesolepurposeofthisprovisionistoenabletheconvictto
presentappealtotheappellateCourt;
4. Nomaximumperiodisprescribedforreleasingtheconvicton
bail;
5. Underthissection389(3)suspensionofsentenceisdeemed
 3

suspension;
6. Suspension of sentence is byproduct of the accused being
releasedonbail;
7. The Trial Court has nopowertosuspendthe sentenceand
thenorderthereleaseoftheconvictonbail.

SotheorderoftrialCourtshouldbelikethis:
The convicted is released on bail, since he intends to
preferappealagainstthejudgmentandorderofthisCourtandthere
arenospecialreasonsforrefusingbail,forsuchperiodaswillafford
sufficient time to present the appeal within limitation period and
obtaintheordersoftheAppellateCourtundersubsection(1);andthe
sentenceofimprisonmentshall,solongasheissoreleasedonbail,be
deemedtobesuspended.

DifferenceinoperationsofSubsection(1)and(3)
1. Subsection(1)comesintoplaywhenappealispendingBUT
Subsection(3)comesintoplaywhentheconvictexpresses
hisintentiontopresentappeal.
2. Subsection (1) tells suspension first and then talks of
release on bail or own bond BUT Subsection (3) tells
release on bail first and then suspension is then the
automaticeffect.
3. Subsection(1)doesnotprescribethattheaccusedmustbe
onbailBUTSubsection(3)canbeusedonlyiftheaccusedis
onbailonthedayofjudgement.
4. Subsection(1)givesoptiontoreleasetheconvictonbailor
hisownbondBUTTrialCourtvideSubsection(3)doesnot
have power to release the convict on his own bond.
HowevertrialCourtcanalsoreleaseaccusedonhisownbond
 4

iftheaccusedispooretc.
5. Innutshell,videSubsection(1)suspensioniscauseandbail
iseffectandvideSubsection(3)bailiscauseandsuspension
iseffect.

SuspensionofFine
4] Wheneveranoffenderisorderedtopayfine,suchpayment
shouldbemadeforthwith.Section424oftheCode,however,enablesthe
Courttosuspendtheexecutionofsentenceinordertoenablehimtopay
theamountoffineeitherinfullorininstalments.Itdealswithtwotypes
ofcaseswhicharelikethis.

5] Subsection (1) provides that when an offender has been

sentencedtofineonlyandtoimprisonmentindefaultofpaymentoffine
and the fine is not paid forthwith, the Court may order that the fine
shouldbepaidinfullwithin30days,orintwoorthreeinstallmentsthe
firstofwhichshouldbepaidwithin30daysandtheotherorothersatan
intervalorintervalsofnotmorethan30days.

6] Subsection(2)referstoacasewherethereisnosentenceof
finebutanorderofpaymentofmoneyhasbeenmadebythe Courtand
fornonpaymentofsuchamount,imprisonmentisawarded.Insuchcases
also,theCourtcangranttimetopayamount.Ineithercase,iftheamount
is not paid, the Court may direct the sentence of imprisonment to be
executedatonce.

7] Hon'able Supreme Court in Ravikant S. Patil v.

SarvabhoumaBagali[(2007)1SCC673]hasheldthat;
 5

"15. It deserves to be clarified that an order

granting stay of conviction is not the rule but is an
exceptiontoberesortedtoinrarecasesdependingupon
thefactsofacase.Wheretheexecutionofthesentenceis
stayed,theconvictioncontinuestooperate.Butwhere
the conviction itself is stayed, the effect is that the
convictionwillnotbeoperativefromthedateofstay.An
orderofstay,ofcourse,doesnotrendertheconviction
nonexistent,butonlynonoperative.Bethatasitmay.
Insofarasthepresentcaseisconcerned,anapplication
was filed specifically seeking stay of the order of
convictionspecifyingtheconsequencesifconvictionwas
not stayed, that is, the appellant would incur
disqualificationtocontesttheelection.TheHighCourt
afterconsideringthespecialreason,grantedtheorder
stayingtheconviction.Astheconvictionitselfisstayed
incontrasttoastayofexecutionofthesentence,itis
notpossibletoacceptthecontentionoftherespondent
that the disqualification arising out of conviction
continuestooperateevenafterstayofconviction."

PARTII
SentencingPolicy
1] Acrimeisanactwhichisharmfultosocietyin general,
eventhoughit'simmediatevictimisanindividual. Thosewhocommit
suchactsareproceededagainstbytheStateinorderthat,ifconvicted,
theymaybepunished.CriminalProceedings,ifsuccessful,resultinoneof
anumberofpunishments,rangingfromhangingtoafineorinabinding
overtokeepthepeace,releaseonprobation,orotheroutcomeknownto
 6

belong distinctively to a criminal law. Punishment is a method of

protecting society by reducing the occurrence of criminal behaviour.
Punishment can protect society by deterring the potential offenders,
preventingtheactualoffenderfromcommittingfurtheroffencesandby
reformingandturninghimintoalawabidingcitizen.

2] Amonthagodebateonthedeathpenaltyofoneconvictin
Bombay Blast case has again invited attention of society towards
sentencing policy. Debate has again resumed, whether death sentence
should remain in the statute books. Many consider the execution by
hangingbynecktilldeathtobeabarbaricmethod.Butrepeatedlythe
SupremeCourt of India has upheld the constitutional validity of death
sentenceandthemethodofexecutionbyhanging. However,duringthe
last two hundred years, the practice of punishment and public opinion
concerningithasbeenprofoundlymodifiedduetotherapidlychanging
socialvaluesandsentimentsofthepeople.Thecrucialproblemtodayis
whetheracriminalistoberegardedbysocietyasanuisancetobeabated
oranenemytobecrushedorapatienttobetreatedorarefractorychild
tobedisciplined?Orshouldheberegardedasnoneofthesethingsbut
simplybepunishedtoshowtoothersthatantisocialconductdoesnot
finallypay.

3] The importance of Sentencing lies in the fact that it

becomes the face of Justice and a future deterrent for the prospective
offenderoflaw.ItissaidbyresearchersthatIndianCriminalCourtsare
championsintheartoffactfindingandlawapplying,butwhenitcomes
totheprocessofSentencing,thereliesthelacuna.Itistheiropinionthat
thesuccessofIndianCriminalCourtsinfactfindingduetounemotional
andobjectiveapproachanditsfailureinSentencingisduetoemotional
reactionandlackofwelldefinedsentencingpolicy.
 7

4] Theprescriptionofpunishmentineachpenalsectionisonly
themeasureprescribedbylawfordealingwithoffenderwhoisprovedto
have committed that crime. But determination of right measure of
punishmentisofagreatdifficulty.Judgeiscalledupontoexercisewide
discretionwhichinvolvesanonerous,delicateandcomplexduty.

5] InNarenderSinghv.StateofPunjab(CRIMINALAPPEAL
NO.686/2014 arising out of S.L.P.(Criminal) No.9547 of 2013)),
Hon'bleSupremeCourthasemphasizedtheneedofsentencingguidelines
statingthatthereareprovisions,statutoryorotherwiseinothercountries,
whichmayguidejudgesforawardingspecificsentence.However,inIndia
we do not have such sentencing policy till date. The Supreme Court
observed that the prevalence of such guidelines may not only aim at
achieving consistency in awarding sentences in different cases, such
guidelinesnormallyprescribethesentencingpolicyaswell.

6] InSomanv.StateofKerala[
(2013)11SCC382],Hon'ble
SupremeCourtobservedthat:
Givingpunishmenttothewrongdoerisattheheart
ofthecriminaljusticedelivery,butinourcountry,itisthe
weakest part of the administration of criminal justice.
Therearenolegislativeorjudiciallylaiddownguidelinesto
assistthetrialcourtinmetingoutthejustpunishmentto
theaccusedfacingtrialbeforeitafterheisheldguiltyof
thecharges

7] In the year 2003, the Malimath Committee laid down the

guidelinestominimizetheuncertaintiesinawardingsentences.Itstated
that:
 8

The Indian Penal Code prescribed

offences and punishments for the same. For many
offences only the maximum punishment is prescribed
andforsomeoffencestheminimummaybeprescribed.
TheJudgehaswidediscretioninawardingthesentence
withinthestatutorylimits.Thereisnownoguidanceto
the Judge in regard to selecting the most appropriate
sentencegiventhecircumstancesofthecase.Therefore
each Judgeexercisesdiscretionaccordingly tohisown
judgment.Thereisthereforenouniformity.SomeJudges
are lenient and some Judges are harsh. Exercise of
unguideddiscretionisnotgoodevenifitistheJudge
thatexercisesthediscretion.Insomecountriesguidance
regardingsentencingoption[s]isgiveninthepenalcode
and sentencing guideline laws. There is need for such
law in our country to minimize uncertainty to the
matterofawardingsentence.

8] It is true that there is no particular sentencing policy or

guidelinetoregulatethediscretionofJudge.Buttherearevariousguiding
factorsandjudgmentsofHon'bleSupremeCourtaswellasvariousHigh
Courtswhichcanbeconsideredwhilesentencingconvictedperson.

9] The main goal of the criminal justicesystemisto

preventtheoccurrenceofcrime,topunishthetransgressors,thecriminals,
to rehabilitate the transgressors and the criminals, to compensate the
victimsasfaraspossible,tomaintainlawandorderinthesocietyandto
detertheoffendersfromcommittinganycriminalactinthefuture.Thus,
themainobjectofsentencingshouldbetoachieveabovementionedgoal
ofourjusticesystem.
 9

10] v.
InAlisterAnthonyPareira StateofMaharashtra(AIR
2012SC3802),theSupremeCourtobservedthat;
Oneoftheprimeobjectivesofthecriminallawis
imposition of [an] appropriate, adequate, just and
proportionate sentence commensurate with the nature
andgravityof[the]crimeandthemannerinwhichthe
crime is done. There is no straitjacket formula for
sentencinganaccusedonproofofcrime.Thecourtshave
evolved certain principles: [the] twin objective of the
sentencing policy is deterrence and correction. What
sentencewouldmeettheendsofjusticedependsonthe
factsandcircumstancesofeachcaseandthecourtmust
keepinmindthegravityofthecrime,motivefor the
crime, nature of the offence and all other attendant
circumstances.

11] ApexCourthasheldinvariousdecisionsthatthetheoryof
proportionality,deterrence,seriousnessandrehabilitationshouldbetaken
intoaccountwhileexercisingdiscretioninsentencing.

12] Hon'bleApexCourthasapproved proportionalityprinciple

inthecaseofShaileshJasvantbhaiandAnotherv.StateofGujaratand
Others,[(2006)2SCC359].Ithasheldthat;
"In operating the sentencing system, law should
adoptthecorrectivemachineryordeterrencebasedon
factualmatrix.Bydeftmodulation,sentencingprocess
besternwhereitshouldbe,andtemperedwithmercy
where it warrants to be. The facts and given
circumstancesineachcase,thenatureofthecrime,the
 10

manner in which it was planned and committed, the

motiveforcommissionofthecrime,theconductofthe
accused, the nature of weapons used and all other
attendingcircumstancesarerelevantfactswhichwould
enterintotheareaofconsideration.Itwasthedutyof
everyCourttoawardpropersentencehavingregardto
thenatureoftheoffenceandthemanner inwhichit
wasexecutedorcommitted.ThesentencingCourtsare
expectedtoconsiderallrelevantfactsandcircumstances
bearing on the question of sentence and proceed to
imposeasentencecommensuratewiththegravityofthe
offence."

13] The theory of retribution is based on the assumption that

causing pain to the offender or making them face other unpleasant
consequences is right and proper. Though it seems to be of primitive
naturebutitspresencecanalwaysbefeltintheCriminalJusticesystem.

14] In KunjuJanaratharan
v.
StateofKerla
(AIR1979SC
916),Hon'bleApexCourtobservedthat:
Theretributivetheoryhashaditsdayandisno
longer valid. Deterrence and reformation are the
primarysocialgoalswhichmakedepreciationoflifeand
libertyreasonableaspenalpanacea.

15] The theoryofprevention authorizestheinflictionofpainin

order to prevent future crimes. General prevention aims at dissuading
members of the society, who have not committed those crimes, from
committingthemandcreatingafearfulenvironmentforthosewhohave
proclivityforcommittingcrimes.
 11

16] eterrence
The d theory assumesthatmanisarationalbeing
whohasafreewill.Butitcanbecounteredwiththeargumentthatthe
human beings and their behavior is too unpredictable to reduce to a
mechanisticformula.Oftenpunishmentsaremadeseveresoastoconvey
themessagethatanyonecommittingcrimeswillbesimilarlydealtwith
thusactingasadeterringforce.

17] ehabilitationisbasedontheassumptionthat
Thetheoryofr
criminality of human being depends upon external and internal forces
whichcanbepredictedbyexpertsinordertopreventfuturecrimes.

18] Mitigating and Aggravating factors also play important

role.Mitigatingandaggravatingfactorshavetobeconstruedinthelight
offactsofeachcaseindependently.Nostraightjacketformulacanbelaid
down in that respect. However, following instances can be said as
aggravatingandmitigatingfactors.

19] AggravatingCircumstances:

19.1] Commission of heinous crime like murder, rape, armed

decoity,kidnappingetc.byapersonwithprevioushistoryof
convictionforcapitalfelonyorhavingsubstantialhistoryof
convictioninseriousoffence.

InMaheshv.StateofM.P.[(1987)2SCR710],ApexCourt
whilerefusingtoreducethedeathsentenceobservedthus:
"It will be a mockery of justice to permit the
accusedtoescapetheextremepenaltyoflawwhenfaced
withsuchevidenceandsuchcruelacts.Togivethelesser
punishment for the accused would be to render the
justicing system of the country suspect. The common
man will lose faith in courts. In such cases, he
 12

understandsandappreciatesthelanguageofdeterrence
morethanthereformativejargon."

19.2] Commissionofoffencebyapersoninvolvedanother
seriousoffence.

19.3] Commissionofoffencewithintenttocreateafearpsychosis
inthepublicatlargeorinapublicplacewithaweaponor
devicewhichcouldbehazardoustothelifeofmorethanone
person.

19.4] Commission of offence for ransom or to gain money or

monetarybenefits.

19.5] Hiredkillings,cruelacts.

19.6] Commissionofoffenceinvolvinginhumanetreatment
andtorturetothevictim.

In Dhananjoy Chatterjee v. State of W.B. (1994 (2) SCC

220),ApexCourthasobservedthatshockinglylargenumberofcriminals
gounpunishedtherebyincreasingly,encouragingthecriminalsandinthe
ultimatemakingjusticesufferbyweakeningthesystem'screditability.The
impositionofappropriatepunishmentisthemannerinwhichtheCourt
responds to the society's cry for justice against the criminal. Justice
demandsthatCourtsshouldimposepunishmentbefittingthecrimesothat
theCourtsreflectpublicabhorrenceofthecrime.TheCourtmustnotonly
keepinviewtherightsofthecriminalbutalsotherightsofthevictimof
the crime and the society at large while considering the imposition of
appropriatepunishment.

In Ravjiv.StateofRajasthan,(1996(2)SCC175) ithas
beenheldinthesaidcasethatitisthenatureandgravityofthecrimeand
not the criminal, which are germane for consideration of appropriate
punishment in a criminal trial. The Court will be failing in its duty if
 13

appropriate punishment is not awarded for a crime which has been

committed not only against the individual victim but also against the
societytowhichthecriminalandvictimbelong.Thepunishmenttobe
awardedforacrimemustnotbeirrelevantbutitshouldconformtoand
be consistent with the atrocity and brutality with which the crime has
beenperpetrated,theenormityofthecrimewarrantingpublicabhorrence
anditshould"respondtothesociety'scryforjusticeagainstthecriminal".
Ifforanextremelyheinouscrimeofmurderperpetratedinaverybrutal
mannerwithoutanyprovocation,themostdeterrentpunishmentisnot
given,thecaseofdeterrentpunishmentwillloseitsrelevance.

19.7] Commission of offence by a person while having lawful

custodyofthevictim.

19.8] Commissionofoffencetopreventapersondischargingpublic
duty.

19.9] Committingattemptofmurderofentirefamilyor
membersofaparticularcommunity.

19.10] Commissionofoffencebyapersononwhomthevictimhas
completetrust.

Hon'ble Bombay High Court in Bhagwat Ganpat Taide

V/s.The State ofMaharashtra, (2006 (3),A.I.R.Bom.
R.250),observedthat;
Thepetitioner/accusedwasateacher.Imparting
knowledgeisanobleprofession.Thepetitionerwas
inapositionoflocoparentis tohispupil.Insteadof
imparting knowledge petitioner was indulging in
molestationsofyounggirlsoftenderage.Iftheconduct
of the petitioner is considered this is not fit case for
showingleniency.

19.11] Commission of offence for a motive which evidences total

depravityandmeanness.
 14

19.12] Commissionofoffencewithoutanyprovocationatthehands
ofvictim.

19.13] Commission of offence in brutal manner that it pricks or

shocks not only the judicial conscience but even the
conscienceofthesociety.

InStateofM.P.v.BabluNatt,[(2009)2S.C.C.272],
Hon'bleApexCourtheldthat;
In recent years, we have noticed that crime
against women are on the rise. These crimes are an
affronttothehumandignityofthesociety.Imposition
ofgrosslyinadequatesentenceandparticularlyagainst
themandateoftheLegislaturenotonlyisaninjusticeto
thevictimofthecrimeinparticularandthesocietyasa
whole in general but also at times encourages a
criminal.TheCourtshaveanobligationwhileawarding
punishmenttoimposeappropriatepunishmentsoasto
respond to the society's cry for justice against such
criminals. Public abhorrence of the crime needs a
reflectionthroughthecourt'sverdictinthemeasureof
punishment.TheCourtsmustnotonlykeepinviewthe
rightsofthecriminalbutalsotherightsofthevictimof
crime and the society at large while considering
impositionoftheappropriatepunishment.Theheinous
crimeofcommittingrapeonahelpless13/14yearsold
girl shakes our judicial conscience. The offence was
inhumane. There are no extenuating or mitigating
circumstancesavailableontherecordwhichmayjustify
impositionofsentencelessthantheminimumprescribed
bytheLegislatureunderSection376(1)oftheAct."
 15

20] MitigatingCircumstances:

20.1] Thecircumstancesinwhichtheoffenceiscommitted,suchas
extreme mental or emotional disturbance or extreme
provocation in contradistinction to all these situations in
normalcourse.

20.2] Theageoftheconvict.

20.3] Thepossibilitiesofindulgingincommissionofthecrimein
future.

20.4] Thepossibilityofreformationandrehabilitation

20.5] Biologicalinfirmityoftheconvictlikecapacitytounderstand
theresultoftheactpurportedlydone

20.6] Themannerinwhichtheoffenceiscommitted

21] Therearemitigatingcircumstancesasstatedabove.Butthe
samecannotbeconstruedmechanically.Hon'bleApexcourtinStateof
Madhyapradesh vs Mehtab, (Cri. Appeal no. 290/2015, dated
13.02.2015)hasobservedthat,

wefindforceinthesubmission,itisthedutyof
thecourttoawardjust sentencetoaconvictagainst
whom charge is proved. While mitigating and
aggravating circumstance may be given due weight,
mechanical reduction of sentence to theperiod
alreadyundergonecannotbeappreciated.Sentencehas
tobefairnotonlytotheaccusedbutalsothevictimand
thesociety.

22] InBrajendrasinghVs.StateofMadhyaPradesh(AIR2012
SC1552),theHon'bleHon'bleApexCourtheldthat;
 16

ThelawenunciatedbythisCourtinitsrecent
judgments,asalreadynoticed,addsandelaboratesthe
principles that were stated in the case of Bachan
Singhandthereafter,inthecaseofMachhiSingh.The
aforesaidjudgments,primarilydissecttheseprinciples
into two different compartments one being the
'aggravating circumstances'whiletheother being the
'mitigatingcircumstance'.TheCourtwouldconsiderthe
cumulativeeffectofboththeseaspectsandnormally,it
maynotbeveryappropriatefortheCourttodecidethe
most significant aspect of sentencing policy with
referencetooneoftheclassesunderanyofthefollowing
heads while completely ignoring other classes under
otherheads.Tobalancethetwoistheprimarydutyof
theCourt.ItwillbeappropriatefortheCourttocometo
a final conclusion upon balancing the exercise that
would helptoadministerthecriminaljusticesystem
better and provide an effective and meaningful
reasoningbytheCourtascontemplatedunderSection
354(3)CodeofCriminalProcedure.

23] In State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Surendra Singh, (AIR

2015SC3980,basedonthetheoryofproportionality,itislaiddownby
Hon'bleApexCourtthat;
Unduesympathytoimposeinadequatesentence
woulddomoreharmtothejusticesystemtoundermine
thepublicconfidenceintheefficacyoflaw.Itistheduty
ofeverycourttoawardpropersentencehavingregardto
thenatureoftheoffenceandthemanner inwhichit
 17

wasexecutedorcommitted.The sentencingcourtsare
expectedtoconsiderallrelevantfactsandcircumstances
bearing on the question of sentence and proceed to
imposeasentencecommensuratewiththegravityofthe
offence.Thecourtmustnotonlykeepinviewtherights
ofthevictimofthecrimebutalsothesocietyatlarge
while considering the imposition of appropriate
punishment.

Meager sentence imposed solely on account of

lapse of time without considering the degree of the
offencewillbecounterproductiveinthelongrunand
againsttheinterestofthesociety.Oneofthe prime
objectives of criminal law is the imposition of
adequate, just, proportionate punishment which
commensurate with gravity, nature of crime and the
mannerinwhichtheoffenceiscommitted.oneshould
keepinmindthesocialinterestandconscienceofthe
society while considering the determinative factor of
sentencewithgravityofcrime.

Thepunishmentshouldnotbesolenientthatit
shocks theconscience ofthe society. Itis, therefore,
solemndutyofthecourttostrikeaproperbalancewhile
awarding the sentence as awarding lesser sentence
encouragesanycriminaland,asaresultofthesame,
the society suffers. Imposition of sentence must
commensuratewithgravityofoffence.
 18

BenifitofProbationofOffender'sAct,1958
24] Therecenttrendofcriminaljusticesystemistoreformthe
criminal rather than to punish him. In India reformatory theory of
punishmentreflectsinsection360oftheCodeofCriminalProcedureand
section3&4oftheProbationofOffendersAct,1958.Aspersection3of
theProbationofOffendersAct,1958thecourtmayreleasetheconvicton
dueadmonitionwhenheisfoundguiltyofhavingcommittedanoffence
punishableundersection379,380,381,404or420ofIndianPenalCode
oroffencepunishablewithimprisonmentfornotmorethantwoyears,and
nopreviousconvictionisprovedagainsthim.Undersection4ofthesaid
Actwhenanypersonisfoundguiltyofhavingcommittedanoffencenot
punishablewithdeathorimprisonment forlifeandthecourtisofthe
opinionthatitisexpedienttoreleasehimonprobationofgoodconduct,
thenthecourtmayinsteadofsentencinghimtoanypunishmentrelease
himonhisexecutingbond,withorwithoutsuretiestoappearandreceive
sentencewhencalleduponduringsuchperiod,notexceeding3years,and
inthemeantimetokeepthepeaceandbeofgoodbehaviour.Therefore,
benefit of Probation of Offenders Act should be given to convict in
deservingcases.

Victimology:

25] Victimsareunfortunatelytheforgottenpeopleinthecriminal
justicedeliverysystem.Thecriminaljusticesystemtendstothinkmoreof
therightsoftheoffenderthanthatofrelieftothevictims.Theanxiety
showntohighlighttherightsoftheoffenderisnotshowninenforcinglaw
relating to compensation which too has a social purpose to serve. The
Court has to take into consideration the effect of the offence on the
victim'sfamilyeventhoughhumanlifecannotberestored,norcanitsloss
 19

bemeasuredbythelengthofaprisonsentence.Notermofmonthsor
years imposed on the offender can reconcile the family of a deceased
victim to their loss, nor will it cure their anguish but then monetary
compensationwillatleastprovidesomesolace.

26] Section 357 Cr.P.C. empowers the Court to award

compensationtothevictim(s)oftheoffenceinrespectoftheloss/injury
suffered.Theobjectofthesectionistomeettheendsofjusticeinabetter
way. This section was enacted to reassure the victim that he is not
forgotteninthecriminaljusticesystem.Theamountofcompensationto
beawardedunderSection357Cr.P.C.dependsuponthenatureofcrime,
extentofloss/damagesufferedandthecapacityoftheaccusedtopayfor
which the Court has to conduct a summary inquiry. However, if the
accused does not have the capacity to pay the compensation or the
compensation awarded against the accused is not adequate for
rehabilitation of the victim, the Court can invoke Section 357A to
recommend the case to the State/District Legal Services Authority for
awardofcompensationfromtheStatefundedVictimCompensationFund
undertheDelhiVictimCompensationScheme,2011.

27] In National Human Right Commission versus State of

Gujaratandanother,(2009)6SUPREMECOURTCASES342,itwas
observedthat
Theroleofvictiminacriminaltrialcannever
belostsightof.Heorsheisaninseparablestakeholder
intheadjudicatingprocess.Theprotectionisnecessary
sothatthereisnomiscarriageofjustice;butprotection
isalsonecessarytorestoreinthem,asenseofhuman
dignity.
 20

28] InD.K.BasuVs.StateofWestBengal[(1997)1SCC416],it
wasobservedthat;
55.Thus,tosumup,itisnowawellaccepted
proposition in most of the jurisdictions, that
monetary or pecuniary compensation is an
appropriate and indeed an effective and sometimes
perhapstheonlysuitableremedyforredressalofthe
establishedinfringementofthefundamentalrightto
lifeofacitizenbythepublicservantsandtheStateis
vicariously liable for their acts. The claim of the
citizenisbasedontheprincipleofstrictliabilityto
which the defence of sovereign immunity is not
availableandthecitizenmustreceivetheamountof
compensationfromtheState,which shall havethe
right to be indemnified by the wrong doer. In the
assessmentofcompensation,theemphasishastobe
on the compensatory and not on punitive element.
Theobjectiveistoapplybalmtothewoundsandnot
to punish the transgressor or the offender, as
awarding appropriate punishment for the offence
(irrespective of compensation) must be left to the
criminalcourtsinwhichtheoffenderisprosecuted,
which the State, in law,is duty bound to do. The
awardofcompensationinthepubliclawjurisdiction
isalsowithoutprejudicetoanyotheractionlikecivil
suitfordamageswhichislawfullyavailabletothe
victimortheheirsofthedeceasedvictimwithrespect
tothesamematterforthetortiousactcommittedby
 21

the functionaries of the State. The quantum of

compensation will, of course, depend upon the
peculiar facts of each case and no strait jacket
formulacanbeevolvedinthatbehalf.Thereliefto
redressthewrongfortheestablishedinvasionofthe
fundamental rights of the citizen, under the public
law jurisdiction is, thus, in addition to the
traditionalremediesandnotinderogationofthem.
The amount of compensation as awarded by the
Court and paid by the State to redress the wrong
done,mayinagivencase,beadjustedagainstany
amountwhichmaybeawardedtotheclaimantby
wayofdamagesinacivilsuit.

CONCLUSION:
29] Thecourtisexpectedtostrikebalancebetweentooharsh
andtoolenientviewwhileawardingsentence.TheJudgeshouldgivethought
togravityoftheoffence,degreeofparticipationoftheconvictintheoffence
and convict's subsequent attitude towards the case. While awarding any
sentence a judge must visualise the effect of sentence on the offender.
Generallyinallcasesexceptingoffenceofimmensegravity,ajudgeshould
askhimselfwhetherhecanavoidsentencingofsendingoffendertoprison.He
must keep in mind that short sentences expose an offender to all bad
influencesofimprisonmentwithoutenablinghimtoanybenefitfromit.In
suchcasesthecourtshouldseewhetherbenefitofProbationofOffendersAct,
1958canbeextended.Inordertoanticipatesuchaneffectthejudgemustbe
equippedwithadequateinformationabouttheoffenderandtheirstatistics.
JudicialvisitstoJailsandcorrectionhomesfromtimetotime,isawelcome
stepwhichmayenableajudgetoseetheactualeffectofsentencespassed.
 22

Apartfromitajudgeisrequiredtohave aninformedoutlookonlife,live
approach to the needs of society and ability to respond to advance
intendmentoflegislationwithintheframeworkoflaw.Afterallthemaralof
thesentencingpolicyis

^^ts [kGka p h O;a d Vh lka M ks ] Rk;k lRdehZ jrh ok<ks * *

30] Withthesebeautifulwordsof SaintDnyaneshwar,thepaper
onthetopicofsuspensionofsentencebytrialcourtandsentencingpolicy
isconcluded.