The Supreme Court recently recommended the Centre to prepare a report within six months on the feasibility of introducing a comprehensive sentencing policy in India to ensure uniformity and fairness in sentencing.
A bench comprising Justice MM Sundresh and Justice SVN Bhatti stressed on the necessity of such a policy, underlining that sentencing should not be judge-centric and must avoid unwarranted disparities.
The bench observed that hearing the accused on the sentence is a valuable right, and the real importance lies only with the sentence, as against the conviction. Mentioning that there is no clear policy or legislation when it comes to sentencing, the bench said that over the years, it has become judge-centric and there are admitted disparities in awarding a sentence.
It mentioned that there is a crying need for a clear sentencing policy, which should never be judge-centric as society has to know the basis of a sentence. It underlined that sentencing shall not be a mere lottery, and shall also not be an outcome of a knee-jerk reaction. It held that sentencing is a very important part of the Fundamental Rights conferred under Articles 14 (equality before law) and 21 (life and liberty) of the Constitution of India. Any unwarranted disparity would be against the very concept of a fair trial and, therefore, against justice, it continued.
The apex court also highlighted the importance of considering the provisions of Section 360 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC), which advocates for the release of convicts on probation of good conduct or after admonition. It noted that this reformative approach should be prioritised before proceeding to sentencing, and ignoring these provisions renders them ineffective.
Subsequently, the court proposed the formation of a sentencing commission including legal experts, psychologists, sociologists, criminologists, executives and legislators to develop comprehensive guidelines.
The bench stated its insights into sentencing policies and the comprehensive models adopted by countries such as Canada, New Zealand, Israel and the UK while also citing previous reports and recommendations on criminal justice reforms by the Law Commission in 2003, emphasizing the urgent need for a distinct sentencing policy in India.
Furthermore, the court also asked the Centre to respond to the suggestion by filing an affidavit within six months that should address the feasibility of introducing a comprehensive sentencing policy, taking into consideration the need for guidelines that ascertain judicial discretion is exercised uniformly and fairly.