Case Note & Summary
The case involved an appeal by the appellant against the sentencing order of the Additional Sessions Judge, Ludhiana, who sentenced him to life imprisonment under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code (I.P.C.), along with additional sentences under Sections 307 and 333 of the I.P.C. The judge did not grant the appellant the benefit of set off under Section 428 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, relying on the precedent set in Kartar Singh vs. State of Haryana. However, a Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court had previously overruled the Kartar Singh judgment in Bhagirath vs. Delhi Administration, clarifying that imprisonment for life should be treated as imprisonment for a term for the purposes of set off. The court analyzed the implications of this interpretation and concluded that the appellant was indeed entitled to the benefit of set off under Section 428. Consequently, the appeals were partly allowed, granting the appellant the relief sought regarding the set off.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Set Off - Entitlement to Set Off - Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, Section 428 - The court held that imprisonment for life is considered imprisonment for a term under Section 428, thus entitling the appellant to set off. The previous judgment in Kartar Singh was overruled by a Constitution Bench, clarifying the interpretation of imprisonment terms. Held that the appellant is entitled to the benefit of set off (Paras 2-3).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the appellant is entitled to the benefit of set off under Section 428 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
Final Decision
The Supreme Court held that the appellant is entitled to the benefit of set off under Section 428 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, thus partially allowing the appeals.
Law Points
- Imprisonment for life
- Set off
- Code of Criminal Procedure
- 1973
- Section 428
- Interpretation of statutes
