Miss Lucy
← All judgments

Harendra Rai vs The State Of Bihar

Supreme Court1 September 2023Vikram Nath · Abhay S. Oka · Sanjay Kishan Kaul

Ratio decidendi

The rule this decision rests on

When imposing a sentence in a case of conviction for murder and attempted murder, the court may decline to award capital punishment and instead impose life imprisonment where the incident occurred nearly three decades before the date of sentencing, considering the passage of time as a relevant mitigating circumstance. Under Section 357 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, fines imposed as sentence may be directed to be applied as compensation to victims and their legal heirs under clause (c) of sub-section (1) thereof, and the court may decline to direct application of fines towards prosecution expenses under clause (a) where the State has not prosecuted the case fairly and has assisted the accused. Under Section 357-A of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, the State may be ordered to pay additional compensation to the legal heirs of deceased victims and injured persons beyond the damages awarded from fines, particularly where the State's conduct during prosecution has caused trauma and harassment to the victim's family.

Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.

Judgment

As delivered

2023INSC806

REPORTABLE

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.1726 OF 2015

HARENDRA RAI …APPELLANT(S)

VERSUS

THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS. …RESPONDENT(S)

JUDGMENT

VIKRAM NATH, J.

1 The acquittal of respondent no.2 recorded by

the Trial Court and the High Court was

reversed vide judgment dated August 18,

2023 and respondent no.2 was convicted

under Section 302 and 307 of the Indian

Penal Code, 18601. By the same order it 1 IPC Signature Not Verified Digitally signed by Charanjeet Kaur Date: 2023.09.06 Criminal Appeal No. 1726 of 2015 15:55:21 IST Reason:

Page 1 of 8

was directed to take respondent no.2 into

custody and produce him today in Court for

being heard on sentence.

2 Crl.M.P.No.169246 of 2023 was filed by

respondent no.2 with a prayer to permit him

to appear virtually considering his health

conditions and that he was already

undergoing life sentence in another murder

case. Crl.M.P. is allowed. Respondent no.2

is present virtually from jail and is duly

represented by his counsel.

3 We have heard learned counsel for the

parties.

4 Considering the facts and circumstances of

the case and the findings recorded by us

and also taking into consideration the fact

Criminal Appeal No. 1726 of 2015 Page 2 of 8 that the incident is of the year 1995, almost

28 years old, awarding death sentence would

not be appropriate and as such we award

imprisonment for life to respondent no.2

under Section 302 IPC along with fine of

Rs.20 lacs. Further, respondent no.2 is

awarded 7 years rigorous imprisonment

under Section 307 IPC along with fine of

Rs.5 lacs. Distribution of fine will be

indicated a little later. Both the sentences to

run concurrently.

5 The fine has been awarded of the magnitude

referred to above considering the shocking

facts and circumstances of the case which

have been considered in detail and findings

Criminal Appeal No. 1726 of 2015 Page 3 of 8 recorded in the judgment dated August 18,

2023.

6 Section 357 of the Code of Criminal

Procedure, 19732 provides that whenever

fine is imposed as a sentence, the Court may

while passing the judgment, order the whole

or in part of the fine recovered to be applied

as per clauses (a) to (d) of sub-section (1)

thereof. Clause (a) provides for defraying the

expenses incurred in the prosecution. We

are not inclined to grant any such expenses

to the State considering the fact that the

State in fact did not prosecute the case

fairly, rather throughout assisted the

accused. Clause (b) and (d) also will have no

2 CrPC Criminal Appeal No. 1726 of 2015 Page 4 of 8 application, however, under clause (c)

considering the conduct of accused no.2,

further the mental, physical, and financial

damages suffered by the victim’s family, the

two deceased and the injured, we direct that

the fine awarded to be paid as damages in

the following manner:

a) We award damages of Rs.10 lacs each to

the legal heirs of two deceased Rajendra

Rai and Daroga Rai. The Trial Court will

get a preliminary enquiry conducted with

regard to the legal heirs of the two

deceased and the amount will be

disbursed to the legal heirs as per the law

of Succession.

Criminal Appeal No. 1726 of 2015 Page 5 of 8

b) Similarly, the amount of fine awarded

under section 307 IPC of Rs.5 lacs would

be disbursed in the same manner by the

Trial Court to the victim if she is alive

and if not, to her legal heirs.

7 Considering the conduct of the State as

noticed in the judgment dated August 18,

2023 and also the amount of trauma and

harassment faced by the victim’s family, we

are of the view that in addition to the

damages awarded under section 357 CrPC

further compensation be awarded under

section 357-A CrPC. The State of Bihar will

compensate the legal heirs of the two

deceased and the injured if alive otherwise

her legal heirs in the like amount of the fine

Criminal Appeal No. 1726 of 2015 Page 6 of 8 awarded above i.e. Rs.10 lacs each to the

legal heirs of the deceased Rajendra Rai and

Daroga Rai and Rs.5 lacs to the injured Smt.

Devi or her legal heirs, as the case may be.

The amount so deposited will be disbursed

in the same manner as provided above for

disbursement of the damages under section

357 CrPC.

8 Amount of fine and compensation as

awarded above to be deposited with the Trial

Court within two months from today failing

which the same shall be got recovered as

arrears of land revenue by the Trial Court.

Appeal stands disposed off as above.

Criminal Appeal No. 1726 of 2015 Page 7 of 8 9 Compliance report to be submitted by the

Trial Court to this Court within four

months. Registry to circulate the compliance

report if filed, and if not filed within the time

allowed, the matter may be listed with office

report for directions.

…………..........................J. [SANJAY KISHAN KAUL]

………….........................J. [ABHAY S. OKA]

………….........................J. [VIKRAM NATH] New Delhi September 01, 2023

Criminal Appeal No. 1726 of 2015 Page 8 of 8

This page reproduces a public judgment and a summary of it. It is research material, not legal advice, and it is no substitute for advice from an advocate on your own facts.

Research this judgment with Miss Lucy

Ask what it holds, what has followed it, and what it means for your matter — in plain English, with the citations.

Try Miss Lucy free