R.N.Mitra vs C.B.I Dehradun
- SCC(2011) 15 SCC 615
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
Where the trial and appellate proceedings in a criminal case have extended over an exceptionally long period — here, over 30 years from the date of the incident — the inordinate delay itself constitutes a special reason warranting reduction of the sentences imposed, even where the convictions are maintained and the sentences already reduced by the High Court remain within reasonable bounds.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 1483 OF 2011 ARISING OUT OF SLP (CRL.) NO. 3448 OF 2010
R.N. MITRA ..... APPELLANT
VERSUS
C.B.I., DEHRADUN ..... RESPONDENT
O R D E R
1. Leave granted.
2. Notice had been issued in this case on 12th
November, 2010, restricted to the quantum of sentence
only.
3. The trial court awarded the following sentences to
the appellant:-
U/S Trial Court
420 IPC RI for 5 years
Fine Rs. 50,000/- and
in default of payment of fine
RI for 2 years
471 r/w 468 IPC RI for one year
Fine Rs. 1,000/- and
in default of payment of fine
RI for 3 months
Crl.A. Of 2011 @ SLP(Crl) 3448 of 2010
2
5(2) r/2 5(1)(d) RI for one year of the Prevention Fine Rs. 10,000/- and of Corruption Act in default of payment of fine
RI for six months
4. The High Court by the impugned judgment maintained
the conviction of the appellant but reduced the sentence
in the following terms:
U/S High Court
420 IPC RI for one year
Fine `10,000/- and
in default of payment of fine
RI for six months
471 r/w 468 IPC RI for one year
Fine `1,000/- and
in default of payment of fine
RI for one month
5(2) r/2 5(1)(d) RI for one year of the Prevention Fine `10,000/- and of Corruption Act default of payment of fine
RI for six months
5. It is also evident from the record that the
incident pertains to the year 1979 and the trial, appeal
and revisional proceedings have gone on for over 30
years. We, therefore, feel that these are special
reasons as to why the sentences awarded to the appellant
for the aforesaid offences should be reduced from one
year to three months.
Crl.A. Of 2011 @ SLP(Crl) 3448 of 2010
3
6. With this modification in the sentence, the appeal
is dismissed. The appellant be taken into custody to
serve out the remaining part of his sentence.
..................J [HARJIT SINGH BEDI]
...................J [GYAN SUDHA MISRA] NEW DELHI JULY 22, 2011.
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