Court Can't Impose More Than 10 Years' Imprisonment For Attempt To Murder If It Thought It Fit To Impose Life Imprisonment U/S 307 IPC: SC
The Supreme Court observed that a Court cannot impose a sentence exceeding the 10-year maximum prescribed under the first part of Section 307 IPC for attempt to murder if it thought it fit not to impose life imprisonment sentence.
The Court was hearing an appeal challenging the concurrent conviction of the appellants under Section 307 read with Section 34 of the IPC and the consequent sentence of 14 years rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 1,50,000 each, with a default penalty of six months simple imprisonment.
The bench of Justice C.T. Ravikumar and Justice Rajesh Bindal observed, “When in unambiguous terms the legislature prescribed the maximum corporeal sentence imposable for the conviction under Section 307, IPC, under the first part and when the court concerned upon convicting the accused concerned thought it fit not to impose imprisonment for life, the punishment to be handed down to the convict concerned in any circumstance cannot exceed the punishment prescribed under the first part of Section 307, IPC.”
Brief Facts-
In the present case, earlier, the Court, after considering conclusive evidence supporting the appellants' conviction under Section 307 IPC with Section 34 IPC, declined to entertain the Special Leave Petition challenging the conviction. The Court issued a limited notice regarding the challenge to the 14-year rigorous imprisonment, questioning its permissibility under Section 307 IPC. The present appeal focuses solely on the sentence length.
The Court perused Section 307 IPC and observed, “…if a man commits an act with such intention or knowledge and under such circumstances that if death had been caused, the offence would have amounted to murder or the act itself is of such a nature as would have caused death in the usual course of an event, but something beyond his control prevented that result, his act would constitute the offence punishable as an attempt to murder under Section 307, IPC.”
The Court further observed, “in case the victim suffered hurt in terms of the second part of Section 307, IPC, the convict can be sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life. In the event the court did not consider that imprisonment for life is not to be imposed the other option, going by the provision, is only to impose such punishment as is mentioned in the first part of Section 307, IPC….punishment with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to 10 years and also to pay fine.”
Accordingly, the Court convicted the rigorous imprisonment of 14 years to rigorous imprisonment of 10 years.
Finally, the Court allowed the appeal and modified the impugned judgment of the High Court and trial Court.
Cause Title: Amit Rana @ Koka & Anr. v. State of Haryana (Neutral Citation: 2024 INSC 543)