Case Note & Summary
The State of Karnataka, through Cubbon Park Police, filed five criminal appeals under Section 377 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 and Section 21 of the National Investigation Agency Act, 2008, seeking enhancement of the sentence imposed on respondents/accused Nos. 3 and 4, Ghayur Ahmad Jamali and Aftab Alam @ Farooq. The accused were convicted by the XLIX Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge (Special Court for Trial of NIA Cases) at Bengaluru on 22.06.2020 in Sessions Case Nos. 868, 869, 870, 871, and 872 of 2013. They were sentenced to 8 years imprisonment (comprising 7 years simple imprisonment and 1 year rigorous imprisonment) for offences punishable under Section 18 of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 read with Sections 120B, 121, 121A, and 123 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, along with a fine of Rs.10,000 each, with a default sentence of 3 months rigorous imprisonment. The State contended that the sentence was inadequate given the gravity of the offences, which involved unlawful activities and conspiracy against the State. The High Court, presided over by Justice B. Veerappa and Justice Ravi V. Hosmani, heard the appeals. The court considered the submissions of the State Public Prosecutor and the counsel for the respondents. After examining the impugned judgment and the record, the court found no merit in the appeals. It held that the sentence imposed by the trial court was not inadequate and did not call for enhancement. Consequently, the court dismissed all five criminal appeals, confirming the conviction and sentence of the accused.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Enhancement of Sentence - Section 377 Cr.P.C., Section 21 NIA Act - State appeal against inadequacy of sentence - The State sought enhancement of sentence imposed on accused Nos. 3 and 4 convicted under Section 18 of Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 read with Sections 120B, 121, 121A, 123 of IPC - The trial court sentenced them to 8 years imprisonment (including 1 year rigorous imprisonment) - The High Court, after hearing, dismissed the appeals and confirmed the sentence, holding that the sentence was not inadequate and did not warrant enhancement (Paras 1-3).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the sentence of 8 years imprisonment (including 1 year rigorous imprisonment) imposed on accused Nos. 3 and 4 for offences under Section 18 of Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 read with Sections 120B, 121, 121A, 123 of IPC is adequate and should be enhanced.
Final Decision
All five criminal appeals are dismissed. The judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 22.06.2020 passed by the XLIX Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge (Special Court for Trial of NIA Cases) at Bengaluru in S.C.Nos.868, 869, 870, 871 & 872/2013 are confirmed.
Law Points
- Enhancement of sentence
- Section 377 Cr.P.C.
- Section 21 NIA Act
- Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act
- 1967
- Section 18
- Section 120B IPC
- Section 121 IPC
- Section 121A IPC
- Section 123 IPC
Case Details
2021 LawText (KAR) (03) 8
Criminal Appeal No. 859 of 2020 C/W Criminal Appeal Nos. 860, 861, 862, 863 of 2020
B. Veerappa, Ravi V. Hosmani
V.M. Shelavanth, SPP-I along with Vijaykumar Majage, Addl. SPP for appellant; Mohammed Tahir for respondents
The State of Karnataka by Cubbon Park Police, Bengaluru
Sri. Ghayur Ahmad Jamali and Sri. Aftab Alam @ Farooq
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Criminal appeals by State seeking enhancement of sentence imposed on accused convicted under UAPA and IPC.
Remedy Sought
State sought to set aside the judgment of conviction and order of sentence insofar as sentence passed, and to enhance the punishment.
Filing Reason
State considered the sentence of 8 years imprisonment (including 1 year rigorous imprisonment) as inadequate for the gravity of offences.
Previous Decisions
Trial court convicted accused Nos. 3 and 4 and sentenced them to 8 years imprisonment (7 years simple imprisonment and 1 year rigorous imprisonment) with fine.
Issues
Whether the sentence imposed by the trial court is inadequate and requires enhancement.
Submissions/Arguments
State argued that the sentence is inadequate given the seriousness of the offences under UAPA and IPC.
Respondents' counsel opposed the appeals, supporting the trial court's sentence.
Ratio Decidendi
The sentence imposed by the trial court is not inadequate and does not warrant enhancement under Section 377 Cr.P.C. and Section 21 NIA Act.
Judgment Excerpts
These Criminal Appeals are arising out of the common impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 22.06.2020 made in S.C.Nos. 868, 869, 870, 871 & 872/2013 on the file of the XLIX Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, (Special Court of NIA Cases), Bengaluru convicting accused Nos. 3 and 4 for imprisonment of 8 years, including 1 year rigorous imprisonment (simple imprisonment for 7 years and 1 year rigorous imprisonment) for the offences punishable under Section 18 of Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 read with Sections 120B, 121, 121A, 123 of IPC with fine of Rs.10,000/- each and in default to pay the fine, to undergo 3 months rigorous imprisonment.
After hearing the learned counsel for the parties, we do not find any merit in these appeals. Accordingly, all the Criminal Appeals are dismissed.
Procedural History
The trial court (XLIX Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Special Court for NIA Cases, Bengaluru) convicted accused Nos. 3 and 4 on 22.06.2020 in five sessions cases (S.C.Nos.868, 869, 870, 871, 872/2013) and sentenced them to 8 years imprisonment. The State filed five criminal appeals under Section 377 Cr.P.C. and Section 21 NIA Act before the High Court of Karnataka seeking enhancement of sentence. The High Court heard the appeals and dismissed them on 22.03.2021.
Acts & Sections
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Cr.P.C.): Section 377
- National Investigation Agency Act, 2008 (NIA Act): Section 21
- Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 (UAPA): Section 18
- Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC): 120B, 121, 121A, 123
