Triple Riding On Motorcycle Not Automatic Proof Of Contributory Negligence; High Court Can Enhance Award Even Without Cross-Appeal: Andhra Pradesh High Court Statutory Power To Lay Electricity Lines Prevails Over Private Land Claims; Landowners Entitled To Compensation, Not Obstruction: Bombay High Court Beer & Whisky Are Allied/Cognate Goods; Use Of Identical Mark For Spirits Infringes 'Godfather' Beer Trademark: Delhi High Court Minimum Percentile Fixed By Indian Nursing Council For B.Sc. Nursing Admissions Must Be Strictly Adhered To; Cannot Be Diluted Without Approval: Calcutta High Court Bride Not Expected To Keep All Gold In Personal Custody In Matrimonial Home; Entrustment To Husband Presumed: Kerala High Court Default Imprisonment Not Additional Punishment But Coercive Measure To Secure Fine; Cannot Become 'De Facto' Debtors' Prison: Karnataka High Court Mahant Is Only A Custodian Of Deity’s Property, Assets Gifted For Temple Maintenance Belong To Public Trust: Gujarat High Court Pendency Of Criminal Antecedents Alone Not A Ground To Deny Bail: Andhra Pradesh High Court Grants Bail In Abduction Case After 3-Year Delay In FIR Beer Falls Under ‘IMFL’ Category; No Obligation To Collect TCS On Sales Prior To June 2003: Telangana High Court Dismissal From Service For Negligence Without Proved Misappropriation Is Disproportionate: Orissa High Court Merit In A Case Does Not Justify Disregarding Statutory Delay: NCDRC Upholds Dismissal Of Star Health's Appeal Filed With 442-Day Delay Limitation Period Under Section 34(3) Arbitration Act Commences Only From Receipt Of Signed Copy Of Award: Madhya Pradesh High Court Government Employee Not Eligible For Regular Promotion During Pendency Of Vigilance Proceeding: Orissa High Court Arrest Warrants Against Directors Under Section 72 CP Act Should Be Last Resort; Proper Procedure Must Be Followed: NCDRC

Supreme Court Sets Uniform Sentencing Standard in Landmark Judgment on Disparity in Sentences

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


On 03 July 2023, In a significant judgment, the Supreme Court of India has addressed the issue of disparity in sentences and established a uniform sentencing standard. The bench comprising Justices S. Ravindra Bhat and Dipankar Datta delivered the judgment in the case of Uggarsain v. The State of Haryana & Ors., Criminal Appeal No(s). 1378-1379 of 2019.

The case involved the conversion of the appellant’s conviction from Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) to Section 304 Part II IPC by the High Court of Punjab and Haryana. The appellant, Uggarsain, had appealed against the conversion of conviction and reduction of sentence. The prosecution had alleged that Uggarsain and others were involved in a violent attack that resulted in the death of the deceased, Subhash.

The trial court had convicted all the accused persons and imposed varying sentences. However, the High Court partially allowed the appeals, reducing the conviction to Section 304 Part II IPC. This led to widely different and disparate outcomes in terms of the sentences imposed on the accused.

The Supreme Court, while addressing the issue of disparity in sentences, emphasized the principle of proportionality in sentencing. The court referred to previous judgments, including Ahmed Hussein Vali Mohammed Saiyed v. State of Gujarat, Jameel v. State of U. P., Guru Basavaraj v. State of Karnataka, and others, which highlighted the importance of imposing appropriate and proportionate punishments based on the nature of the offense, circumstances of its commission, and other relevant factors.

The court observed that the sentencing in this case was flawed and arbitrary, with no rationale for the wide disparity in the sentences imposed on the accused. It held that the appropriate sentence, considering the totality of circumstances, would be five years of rigorous imprisonment. However, it took into account the fact that some of the accused had already served sentences longer than five years and left their sentences undisturbed.

The Supreme Court’s judgment establishes a uniform sentencing standard and highlights the need for proportionate sentences in criminal cases. It underscores that sentencing should be based on the gravity of the offense and relevant factors, ensuring fairness and justice in the criminal justice system.

This landmark judgment is expected to have a significant impact on future sentencing decisions, promoting consistency and fairness in the imposition of sentences.

The court’s decision in Uggarsain v. The State of Haryana & Ors. Serves as an important precedent for addressing disparities in sentencing and upholding the principle of proportionality in criminal law.

Date of Decision: July 3, 2023   

UGGARSAIN  vs THE STATE OF HARYANA & ORS. 

Latest Legal News