In the matter of Parvinder Kansal v. State of NCT of Delhi, a criminal appeal was filed before the Supreme Court which sought enhancement of the sentence imposed for an offence under Section 364A read with Section 34 of IPC. The appeal was dismissed by the court.
Brief Facts of the Case
On 15th October 2007, FIR was registered against the second respondent for the offence u/s 364A r/w Section 34 of IPC. After the charge-sheet was filed against the second respondent, the matter referred to the Special Judge (NDPS), North District, Rohini Courts, Delhi. The court convicted the second respondent for an offence punishable under Sections 364A, 302, and 201, IPC in its judgment dated 30th July 2019. The complainant filed an appeal before the HC challenging the order of sentence, that the sentence of life imprisonment imposed on the second respondent is required to be enhanced to the death penalty. The HC dismissed the appeal stating that it is not maintainable.
Arguments of the appellant
The counsel appeared on the behalf of the appellant contended that Section 372 of Cr.PC gives the right to the victim to appeal when the court has convicted the accused for the lesser offence, and the scope of the appeal extends for the lesser sentence also. It was also submitted that when the appellant’s son was kidnapped and demand a sum of money, the same was paid to the second respondent however his son was brutally murdered. Accordingly, the sentence for the second respondent was required to be increased to the death penalty. The counsel also contended that the HC had not examined the provision under Section 372 of CrPC appropriately and dismissed the appeal.
Arguments of the State
The counsel appeared on behalf of the state submitted that the victim’s appeal is not maintainable under Section 372 of CrPC concerning an increase in sentence. He also stated that the proviso of Section 372 of CrPC gives a right of appeal to the victim but it is confined to three aspects i.e, acquittal of the accused, the conviction of the accused for a lesser offence, or for imposing inadequate compensation. However, the victim has no such provision in appeal, for challenging the order of sentence as inadequate.
Observation of the Court
It was observed that the victim’s appeal does not fall under those three aspects given in Section 372 of CrPC. Whereas, the state government has the power to prefer appeal for inadequate sentence under Section 377 of CrPC.
Court’s Decision
The Court upheld the decision of the High Court to dismiss the appeal by stating as non-maintainable. The High court relied upon the judgment of the National Commission for Women v. State of Delhi & Anr. (2010) 12 SCC 599, and dismissed the appeal.
Libertatem.in is now on Telegram. Follow us for regular legal updates and judgment from courts. Follow us on Google News, Instagram, LinkedIn, Facebook & Twitter. You can subscribe to our Weekly Email Updates. You can also contribute stories like this and help us spread awareness for a better society. Submit Your Post Now.
