CHAPTER-III

LEGISLATIVE PRESPECTIVE OF SENTENCING LAWS

3.1 INTRODUCTION

With the goals of delivering justice and upholding public safety and order, the
legislative framework that governs sentencing legislation in India is essential to the
functioning of the criminal justice system. This framework is principally created by the
Cr.P.C.1 and the IPC2, which are augmented by a number of additional legislation
intended to deal with certain offenses. These statutes balance judicial discretion with
legislative duties by providing comprehensive rules for categorizing crimes and their
associated sanctions.

The core criminal law is outlined in the Indian Penal Code, which was passed in
1860 and specifies crimes and associated penalties. It offers a variety of punishments for
various offenses, allowing judges to tailor sentences according to the gravity of the
offense and the particulars of each case. By describing the procedural elements of
criminal trials, including the sentencing process, the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973,
supplements the Indian Penal Code by guaranteeing that trials are handled fairly and that
all pertinent circumstances are taken into account before delivering a punishment.

In addition, a number of special laws have been created to address particular

categories of criminal activity. Examples of these laws include the POCSO 3 and NDPS4.
In order to guarantee severe punishment for significant transgressions, these regulations
frequently incorporate obligatory minimum terms.

Sentencing practices in India are also influenced by judicial interpretations and

significant decisions made by the Supreme Court and High Courts. While honoring the
statutory framework, these court rules support uniformity, justice, and proportionality in

1
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973
2
Indian Penal Code,1860
3
Protection of Children from Sexual Offenses Act, 2012
4
Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act of 1985
sentence. All of these components work together to create a complete system that is
intended to protect the rule of law, efficiently administer justice, and adjust to the
changing requirements of society.

3.2 INDIAN PENAL CODE, 18605

Enacted in 1860, the Indian Penal Code (IPC) classifies different offenses in a
methodical manner in order to preserve a logical and all-encompassing legal system.
These classifications aid in the efficient administration of justice by providing a precise
definition of criminal acts and the associated penalties. Offenses are divided into a
number of general categories under the IPC.

3.2.1 CATEGORIZATION OF OFFENCES UNDER IPC

Treason and sedition, as well as activities intended to destroy the government,

such as sedition (Section 124A), are crimes against the state. These include declaring war
on the government (Sections 121–130). The following are classified as offenses against
public tranquility: rioting (Sections 146–148), unlawful assembly (Sections 141–145),
and inciting hatred between groups (Section 153A). The army, navy, and air force are
subject to crimes such as desertion and aiding and abetting mutiny, which are covered by
Sections 136–140 and Section 136–140, respectively.

False evidence and associated offenses, such as providing false information

(Sections 191–193), creating false information (Sections 194–195), and impeding public
employees in the performance of their duties (Section 186), are considered offenses
against public justice. The laws on public nuisance (Sections 268–294) and obscenity in
public places (Section 294) pertain to offenses against public health, safety, convenience,
decency, and morality. Religious offenses include offending religious sensibilities, such
as damaging or contaminating houses of worship (Section 295) and inciting religious
fervor (Section 295A).

5
Now replaced with Bhartiya Nayaya Sanhita , 2023
 Homicide and murder, including culpable homicide (Sections 299–304) and
murder (Section 302), are crimes that have an impact on the human body. They also
include kidnapping and abduction, which include kidnapping from lawful guardianship
(Section 361) and abduction (Sections 362-369), as well as assault and harm, which
includes inflicting injury (Sections 319-338), serious hurt (Sections 320-325), and assault
(Sections 351-358).

Theft, extortion, and robbery, such as those included by Sections 378–379, 383–
389, and Section 390, are crimes against property. They also encompass burglary and
criminal trespass, which includes breaking into houses (Sections 445–462) and
committing criminal trespass (Sections 441-448). Forgery and counterfeiting, including
using a forged document as real (Section 471), forging papers (Sections 463–471), and
counterfeiting money (Sections 489A–489E), are crimes related to documents and
property markings.

Bigamy (Sections 494–495) and adultery (Section 497 – note that adultery has
been decriminalized by the Supreme Court in 2018) 6 are offenses related to marriage.
According to Sections 499–500, defamation involves uttering or disseminating
defamatory remarks. Threats and blackmail are included in the categories of criminal
intimidation (Sections 503-506) and insult intended to cause a breach of peace (Section
504).

The court system uses the classification of offenses under the IPC as a guide to
successfully categorize, trial, and punish different criminal behaviors. Every category
deals with certain kinds of crimes, with precise definitions and suitable penalties to
protect the law and guarantee justice.

3.2.2 TYPES OF PUISHMENTS UNDER IPC

The Indian Penal Code (IPC) classifies and punishes crimes based on their
severity and kind, with the goals of preventing criminal activity, upholding the rule of
law, and preserving social order. The death penalty, which is imposed under Section 302

6
Joshep Shine vs. UOI 2019 (3) SCC
of the IPC for crimes like murder, is the worst kind of punishment. According to judicial
discretion and case law, this punishment is only applied in the "rarest of rare"
circumstances (Indian Penal Code, 1860).

Another notable type of punishment under the IPC is life imprisonment, in which
the guilty party is detained for the duration of their natural life or for a predetermined
length. It applies in situations like murder (Section 302) and some kidnapping and
abduction cases (Section 364A). Rigorous imprisonment, which varies in length
according to the offense, entails hard labor and harsher confinement circumstances than
ordinary incarceration. Strict imprisonment is stipulated as part of the sentence regime
under sections 376 (rape), 395 (dacoity), and 396 (dacoity with murder) of the Indian
Penal Code, 1860.

Simple imprisonment is for less serious offences is a set amount of time spent in
a jail without being forced to work hard. This type of penalty is frequently employed in
place of harsher types of incarceration. Fines are additional financial penalties that are
levied based on the type of infraction committed. In the event of nonpayment, further
incarceration may ensue, as specified by Section 63 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.

A court may, under certain circumstances, impose forfeiture of property, seizing

assets obtained by or utilized in the commission of criminal activity (Section 53 IPC).
Although it happens seldom, whipping may also be punished in accordance with several
IPC provisions (Section 53). Instead of immediately punishing a first-time offender, a
court may choose to release them under specified conditions under the terms of the
Probation of Offenders Act, 1958. Section 357 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 permits
the court to impose compensation to victims for harm, loss, or damage resulting from the
offense.

These penalties are carefully outlined in a number of parts of the Indian Penal
Code, guaranteeing that the sentence is appropriate for the type and seriousness of the
crime that was committed. Sentencing depends heavily on judicial discretion, which
guarantees that each sentence is appropriate and takes into account the particular facts of
the case while adhering to accepted legal precedents and principles (Indian Penal Code,
1860).

3.2.3 JUDICIAL DISCRETION UNDER IPC

The IPC gives judges judicial discretion in sentencing, which enables them to
take into account a number of circumstances while deciding on the proper sentence.
These elements might include the type and seriousness of the crime, the intention and
motivation of the perpetrator, the effect on the victim or society, and any aggravating or
mitigating circumstances that are brought forward at trial. For instance, although murder
is punishable by death under Section 302 of the IPC, the court may decide to apply the
death sentence or a less harsh punishment like life in prison based on considerations like
provocation or the defendant's mental state.

Furthermore, other provisions of the IPC, such as those pertaining to crimes

against people, public order offenses, and property offenses, are also subject to judicial
discretion in their interpretation and application. For example, while determining whether
to sentence someone to jail time or a fine for stealing (Section 378), the court may take
into account the value of the stolen goods, the offender's prior criminal history, and their
desire to make restitution.

Although the IPC offers a legal framework, the use of judicial discretion
guarantees that justice is carried out equitably and in conformity with the values of
fairness and moral rectitude. With this latitude, judges can tailor sentences to the
particulars of each case, ensuring that the law is applied consistently while taking into
account the complexity of situations and human conduct.
In conclusion, the Indian criminal justice system relies heavily on judicial
discretion under the IPC, which enables judges to make complex, situation-specific
sentencing choices that respect the rule of law and guarantee justice is administered
fairly.
3.3 CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE, 19737

Along with the Indian Penal Code (IPC), the Code of Criminal Procedure
(Cr.P.C), which was passed in 1973, serves as the foundation for India's sentencing
strategy. The Cr.P.C provides procedural rules for a fair trial and sentence, whereas the
IPC identifies crimes and their associated penalties. It makes it easier to record evidence,
question witnesses, and offer arguments during trials, enabling a thorough analysis of the
facts prior to punishment. Judges are given discretion in sentencing under the Cr.P.C,
which takes into account the seriousness of the offense, the offender's past, and any
aggravating or mitigating circumstances that may have been present. It also includes
procedures for probation and restorative measures to promote rehabilitation over jail, as
well as procedures for appeals and reviews to maintain procedural fairness and accuracy
in sentencing judgments. All things considered, the Criminal Procedure Code makes sure
that sentences in India are in line with the ideals of equity, justice, and efficient
management of the criminal justice system.

3.3.1 TRIAL AND SENTENCING PROCEDURE

In India, the trial and sentencing processes are described in great detail under the
Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) to guarantee due process and justice. The 1973
Criminal Procedure Code, which prioritizes the rights of both the prosecution and the
accused, regulates the procedural elements of criminal cases from the point of inquiry to
the point of appeal.

 Trial Procedure: The First Information Report (FIR), which is filed to commence
an inquiry, is the first step in the systematic approach to criminal proceedings
required by the Cr.P.C. Examining witnesses, documenting their testimonies, and
having the prosecution and defense present evidence are all part of the trial
7
Now replaced by Bhartiya Nagrik Sarankshan Sanhita, 2023
 process. The accused is given the chance to cross-examine witnesses and submit a
defense, and the court makes sure that all pertinent information is taken into
account. The goal of this phase is to prove the accused person's guilt or innocence
beyond a reasonable doubt.
 Sentence Procedure: The court proceeds to the sentence stage as soon as guilt is
proven. Judges can use the criteria provided by the Cr.P.C to decide on suitable
sentences depending on the kind of offense committed, the offender's past, and
any aggravating or mitigating factors. When it comes to punishment, judges have
authority over a variety of choices. These include fines, community service,
probation, and simple or harsh incarceration. The objective is to apply a penalty
that is appropriate for the offense while taking justice, rehabilitation, and
deterrence into account.
 Reviews and Appeals: The CrPC permits appeals to higher courts of convictions
and penalties. This guarantees the preservation of procedural justice and legal
principles throughout the legal system. As a protection against injustices,
appellate courts examine judgments made by subordinate courts to confirm that
legal interpretations and punishment calculations are accurate.
 Unique Provisions: The Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC) has unique provisions
for particular circumstances, such trials involving minors or offenses covered by
statutes such as the Protection of Children from Sexual Offenses (POCSO) Act or
the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act (NDPS Act). By ensuring
that sentencing and procedural guidelines are customized to the particulars of
each case, these rules advance equitable justice.

3.3.2 SENTENCE HEARING

Sentence hearings are significant processes that take place after a criminal trial's
verdict of conviction, according to India's Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC). Enacted
in 1973, the Criminal Procedure Code delineates the procedural elements that oversee
sentence proceedings, which are crucial in ascertaining the penalty meted out to an
acquitted defendant.
  Conduct of Sentencing Hearing: The sentencing hearing starts when the court
determines that the accused has committed a crime. In this stage, the judge
decides on the proper sentence by taking into account a number of circumstances.
The kind and gravity of the offense, the criminal history of the offender, the effect
on the victim or society, and any aggravating or mitigating circumstances put up
by the prosecution or defense are examples of these elements.
 Judicial Discretion: Juries are given a great deal of latitude by the CrPC to
customize sentences to the particulars of each case. With this discretion, penalties
are imposed that are both appropriate for the seriousness of the offense and take
into account the offender's unique situation. There are other sentencing
alternatives available to judges, such as community service, probation, harsh or
light jail, fines, and various forms of rehabilitation.
 Evaluation and Arguments Considered: The prosecution and defense present
evidence and make arguments during sentencing hearings, just like during trial
processes. When the defense presents mitigating elements like regret, good
behavior, or extenuating circumstances that might support a more lenient
sentence, the prosecution may highlight the gravity of the charge and push for a
harsher sentence.
 Victim Impact Statements: Under some conditions, victim impact statements
have become more recognized in sentencing proceedings in recent years. Through
these declarations, victims or others speaking on their behalf can convey the
psychological, physical, or monetary effects of the crime on their life. Victim
impact statements are not required, but they can have an impact on sentence
choices by giving courts a more comprehensive picture of the offense's
repercussions.
 Appeals and Reviews: The Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC) offers procedures
for the prosecution and defense to file an appeal with a higher court challenging
the conviction or the sentence imposed after the sentencing hearing. By ensuring
that sentence decisions are scrutinized for legal soundness and procedural
fairness, this appellate procedure protects against injustices.

3.3.3 SPECIAL PROCEDURE

 The CrPC also outlines unique protocols for dealing with offenders who fall into
specified groups, including women, children, and people with disabilities. For instance,
different processes are outlined for juveniles' trials and punishment under the Juvenile
Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015.

3.4 SPECIAL LEGISLATIONS

Under criminal jurisprudence, there are various special legislations other than IPC
and Cr.P.C.

3.4.1 NDPS ACT

Sentencing in India is based on offenses involving drugs and psychotropic

substances, as defined by the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act.
Enacted in 1985, the NDPS Act delineates rigorous measures aimed at countering drug
trafficking, usage, and manufacture. According to this Act, sentencing has certain
penalties that change according to the kind and amount of drugs involved as well as the
type of violation committed.

 Types of Offenses: The NDPS Act divides crimes into several categories
according on how serious they are. These include acts including manufacturing,
trafficking, using, possessing, and funding illegal drug activity.
 Types of Punishments: Depending on the seriousness of the violation, the Act
stipulates harsh punishments, such as fines and imprisonment for varied terms.
For example, drug charges involving little amounts may have lighter sentences,
whereas offenses involving larger quantities may result in longer jail terms and
more penalties.
 Judicial discretion is permitted in extraordinary situations, even though the
NDPS Act stipulates minimum required punishments for specific acts. Judges
may take into account elements including the accused's involvement in the crime,
their cooperation with law enforcement, and any mitigating circumstances that
were brought up during the trial.
  Probation and Rehabilitation: Rather than incarcerating someone, courts may
choose to adopt probation or treatment-focused measures, particularly in the case
of first-time offenders or those with drug addiction problems. These policies seek
to lower recidivism rates among convicts and encourage rehabilitation.
 International Obligations: In keeping with international drug control treaties, the
NDPS Act demonstrates India's will to fight drug trafficking and guarantee
adherence to international norms.

3.4.2 POCSO ACT8

Sentence for offenses involving child exploitation and sexual abuse is determined
by the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, 2012 in India. The
POCSO Act was enacted in order to provide prompt justice and a strong legal framework
protecting minors from sexual assaults. This Act's sentencing guidelines place a high
priority on the rights and welfare of minor victims while punishing offenders with severe
punishments.

 Categories of Offenses: Sexual crimes against minors, such as sexual assault,

sexual harassment, and child-performed pornography, are divided into different
categories under the POCSO Act. Non-contact offenses like online child
exploitation and sexual abuse are also covered under the Act.
 Types of Punishments: Serious penalties, such as hard incarceration for variable
lengths, fines, and in certain situations, life imprisonment, are prescribed under
the POCSO Act for violations against minors. The type of offense committed, the
victim's age, and the offender-victim connection are some of the variables that
affect how harsh the penalty will be.
 Obligatory Minimum Sentences: In order to guarantee that criminals, face severe
penalties, the Act contains obligatory minimum sentences. For example, the
POCSO Act mandates minimum jail terms for some acts, which serves as a strong
deterrence against child sexual abuse.

8
Protection of Child from Sexual offences Act, 2012
  Judicial Discretion: Although the POCSO Act sets minimum punishments for
certain crimes, judges have the authority to vary sentences based on the facts of
each case and the evidence produced at trial. This enables judges to customize
sentences based on the seriousness of the crime and the particulars of each case.
 Victim-Centric Approach: The POCSO Act's victim-centric approach, which puts
the child victim's best interests and welfare first, directs sentencing. When
calculating the sentence, courts may additionally take into account how the
offense has affected the kid and their family.
 Special Courts and Speedy Trials: In order to provide prompt justice and lessen
trauma to child victims, the POCSO Act requires the creation of special courts for
the trial of offenses covered by the Act. Additionally, certain protocols are in
place to make it easier to capture testimony and evidence in a way that is kid-
friendly.

3.4.3 SC & ST ACT9

The SC/ST Act, also known as the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes
(Prevention of Atrocities) Act, governs sentencing for crimes committed against
members of India's Scheduled Castes (SC) and Scheduled Tribes (ST). The SC/ST Act
was enacted with the intention of shielding these underprivileged groups from prejudice
and acts of violence. It includes clauses that call for severe penalties for those who
commit atrocities.

 Categories of Offenses: According to the SC/ST Act, crimes can be classified as

any kind of atrocity perpetrated against members of the SC/ST community. Acts
motivated by caste-based prejudice, such as assault, sexual exploitation, arson,
and intimidation, are among the actions that fall under this category.
 Types of Punishments: Violations against SC/ST persons have harsh
punishments under the Act, which include fines and imprisonment for various
lengths of time. Because they are discriminatory in character and have an adverse
effect on vulnerable populations, offenses under the Act are handled seriously.

9
Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act,1882
  As with other specialized laws, the SC/ST Act has Mandatory Minimum
Sentences to make sure that those who commit crimes against SC/ST people are
held accountable and suffer severe consequences. The purpose of these minimum
obligatory punishments is to serve as a deterrence to violence and prejudice based
on caste.

 Judicial Discretion: Although the SC/ST Act stipulates minimum terms for
specific crimes, judges have the option to determine the appropriate sentence by
taking into account a number of variables, including the gravity and nature of the
offense, the impact on the victim and community, and any aggravating or
mitigating circumstances that were brought up during the trial. This latitude gives
judges the ability to customize sentencing for each case based on its unique set of
facts.
 Victim Protection and Rehabilitation: The SC/ST Act's sentencing guidelines are
based on victim protection and rehabilitation principles, which guarantee the
preservation of the victims' rights and dignity throughout the legal proceedings. In
order to aid victims in their rehabilitation and reintegration into society, courts
may also impose compensation or other restorative measures.
 Special Courts and Expedited Trials: In order to guarantee prompt justice and
efficient application of the law, the SC/ST Act requires the creation of special
courts for the trial of offenses covered by the Act. Additionally, special protocols
are in place to make it easier to capture testimony and evidence quickly in
situations involving crimes against SC/ST people.

3.5 CONCLUSION

In conclusion, India's legislative viewpoint on sentencing demonstrates a complex

approach that seeks to strike a balance between the application of punitive measures and
the goals of rehabilitation, deterrence, and community protection. The statutory basis for
sentencing procedures is provided by the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) and the
Indian Penal Code (IPC), which are complemented by special laws such as the Narcotic
Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act and the Protection of Children from
Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act. These regulations allow judges to customize sentencing
according to the unique circumstances of each case, while still guaranteeing that
punishments are commensurate with the seriousness of the offenses.

The focus on equity, uniformity, and observance of the law highlights India's
dedication to protecting the rule of law and guaranteeing justice for all parties involved in
the criminal justice system. Sentence policies are shaped by continuing reforms and
judicial interpretation as the legal environment changes, with the goal of achieving equal
outcomes and boosting public trust in the administration of justice.