BABA NATARAJAN PRASAD Vs. M. REVATHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Leave granted.

(2.) Salmond defined 'crime' as an act deemed by law to be harmful for society as a whole although its immediate victim may be an individual. Long-long ago, Kautilya said: "it is the power of punishment alone which when exercised impartially in proportion to guilt and irrespective of whether the person punished is the king's son or the enemy, that protects this world and the next". In the decision in State of Punjab v. Bawa Singh,(2015) 3 SCC 441 this Court held that it is 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. The sentencing courts are expected to consider all the relevant facts and circumstances bearing on the question of sentence and proceed to impose a sentence commensurate with the gravity of the offence. The court must not only keep in view the rights of the victim but also the society at large while considering the imposition of appropriate punishment. Meagre sentence imposed solely on account of lapse of time without considering the degree of the offence will be counterproductive in the long run and against the interest of the society, it was further held. In Bawa Singh's case (supra), this Court referred to the earlier decisions in Hazara Singh v. Raj Kumar & Ors,(2013) 9 SCC 516 and Shailesh Jasvantbhai & Anr. v. State of Gujarat & Ors,(2006) 2 SCC 359 with agreement, in paragraphs 13 and 14 thereof, as under:-

(3.) Besides the decisions in Hazara Singh and Shailesh Jasvantbhai's cases (supra), this Court also referred to the decisions in Ahmed Hussein Vali Mohammed Saiyed & Anr. v. State of Gujarat,(2009) 7 SCC 254, State of Madhya Pradesh v. Bablu,(2014) 9 SCC 281, and State of Madhya Pradesh v. Surendra Singh,(2015) 1 SCC 222 therein. Thereupon, in paragraph 17 of Bawa Singh's case (supra) this Court held thus:-