Supreme Court Sets Aside High Court's Sentencing Delegation, Emphasizes Appellate Duty, High Court's directive for trial court to sentence after conviction reversed; Supreme Court mandates hearing and sentencing by appellate court.
In a significant ruling, the Supreme Court of India has overturned a procedural anomaly by the Calcutta High Court, emphasizing the appellate court's duty to hear the convict on sentencing after a conviction is recorded for the first time. The case, "Mukesh Kumar Yadav v. State (UT of Andaman & Nicobar Islands)," involved the reversal of an acquittal by the High Court, which found the appellant guilty of offenses under Sections 376 and 312 of the Indian Penal Code.
The Supreme Court highlighted that the High Court, after convicting Mukesh Kumar Yadav, improperly directed the trial judge to handle the sentencing. According to the Supreme Court, this delegation was contrary to Section 386(a) of the Criminal Procedure Code, which mandates that the appellate court itself must impose the sentence after a conviction.
The judgment referenced several precedents, including "Allauddin Mian v. State of Bihar" and "Dagdu v. State of Maharashtra," underlining that both trial and appellate courts must ensure the accused is heard on the question of sentence, adhering to principles of natural justice and fair play.
Justice K.V. Viswanathan, delivering the judgment, asserted that the appellate court is obligated to hear the convict on sentencing, a duty that cannot be delegated to the trial court after a conviction is recorded for the first time. The Supreme Court has remanded the matter back to the Calcutta High Court, instructing it to conduct a hearing on the sentencing of Mukesh Kumar Yadav and impose an appropriate sentence as per the law.
The Supreme Court's ruling ensures adherence to proper judicial procedures, reinforcing the convict's right to be heard on the question of sentence, thus upholding the principles of natural justice.
Bottom Line:
An appellate court, while reversing an acquittal and convicting an accused for the first time, is duty-bound to hear the convict on the question of sentence and cannot delegate the task of sentencing to the trial court.
Statutory provision(s):
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 Section 386, Section 235
