New Delhi, Jan 9 (PTI) Courts are not supposed to be insensitive, the Supreme Court said on Friday while modifying the sentence awarded to a 80-year-old man convicted in a criminal case of 1992 to the period he already underwent in jail.
A bench of Justices K Vinod Chandran and N V Anjaria upheld the conviction of the man, who has undergone total incarceration of six years and three months in the case.
The Madhya Pradesh High Court had sentenced the appellant to seven years’ imprisonment after holding him guilty for offence punishable under Section 304 Part II of the Indian Penal Code (culpable homicide not amounting to murder).
“The appellant is more than 80 years of age at present. Since the appellant is an aged person, and in the December of his life, it would be harsh and inadvisable to send him behind the bars again at this stage. The courts are not supposed to be insensitive,” the top court said.
While upholding his conviction, the bench said in view of his advanced age and considering the totality of the facts and circumstances, his sentence is reduced to what is already undergone.
“The appeal stands dismissed subject to the above modification in the sentence,” the bench said.
The apex court delivered its verdict on an appeal filed by the man challenging the high court’s order, which altered his conviction from under Section 302 (murder) of the IPC to Section 304 Part II.
In December 1997, a trial court convicted the appellant along with others for the offences, including that of murder, and he was sentenced to life imprisonment.
The man then challenged his conviction and sentence before the high court.
The top court noted that an FIR was lodged in December 1992 after a quarrel took place between the appellant’s son and another person.
One of the persons, who received injuries in the assault that broke out pursuant to the quarrel, died during treatment.
Dealing with the facts of the case, the bench noted that the scenario of the offence was one of a “free fight” and there was a commotion where the anger-filled group of two rival parties attacked each other and injuries were sustained by both sides.
It said the high court was justified in its reasoning that in such circumstances, it was not possible to reason and to conclude that there was a formation of unlawful assembly with the common object of causing death.
“The high court was correct in its approach in holding the appellant guilty for the offence punishable under Section 304 Part II IPC by assessing the individual role on his part,” the bench said.
It noted that the appellant was arrested on December 19, 1992, and the total period of his incarceration came to six years and three months.
The bench said the high court granted him bail in August 1998, and he surrendered on December 6, 2010, before the apex court granted him bail on August 5, 2011. PTI ABA ARI
This report is auto-generated from PTI news service. ThePrint holds no responsibility for its content.