Searching Case Laws & Precedent on Legal Query.....!
Scanned Judgements…!
Checking relevance for Accused ‘X’ VS State of Maharashtra...
2019 4 Supreme 454 : Yes, a convicted person can appeal for a lesser sentence under the Indian Penal Code (IPC). Section 235(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 mandates a pre-sentencing hearing where the accused is given a real and effective opportunity to bring on record material or evidence showing mitigating circumstances for a lesser punishment. The appellate court can rectify any violation of this procedure by remanding the matter or by itself giving an effective opportunity to the accused. Furthermore, post-conviction mental illness has been recognized as a mitigating factor in death penalty cases, particularly under Article 21 of the Constitution of India and the Mental Health Care Act, 2017, which supports the possibility of a lesser sentence for such individuals. In this case, the death sentence was modified to imprisonment for life due to the accused''''s post-conviction mental illness, demonstrating that a lesser sentence can be granted based on such grounds.Checking relevance for Bachan Singh VS State Of Punjab...
1979 0 Supreme(SC) 396 : Yes, a convicted person can appeal for a lesser sentence under the IPC. The judgment confirms that the accused had the opportunity to plead for reduction of their sentence during the hearing of their own appeal against conviction, which constituted a sufficient opportunity to argue for a lesser sentence. The court explicitly stated that the accused''''s appeal provided them with the necessary opportunity to plead for reduction of sentence, and that there was no illegality in the process, even when the High Court enhanced the sentence. This establishes that an appeal for a lesser sentence is permissible and forms part of the appellate process.Checking relevance for Zahoor VS State of U. P. ...
2011 0 Supreme(SC) 452 : Yes, a convicted person can appeal for a lesser sentence under the IPC. In the case documented, the court reduced the sentence from 10 years to 5 years under Section 304 Part-I of the IPC, considering the age of one of the appellants. The court explicitly held that it may consider the age of the accused in determining the appropriate sentence, which supports the right to appeal for a lesser sentence based on mitigating factors such as age.Checking relevance for State of A. P. VS Polamala Raju @ Rajarao...
2000 5 Supreme 558 : Under Section 376(2) of the Indian Penal Code, a convicted person may seek a lesser sentence only if there are ''''special and adequate reasons'''' for doing so, as provided by the proviso to the section. However, such reasons must be clearly recorded in the judgment or order by the sentencing court. The court must disclose these reasons to enable appellate review. In the absence of any such special or adequate reasons, particularly in cases involving rape of a child below 12 years of age, the minimum mandatory sentence of 10 years'''' rigorous imprisonment cannot be reduced. The reduction of sentence must not be mechanical or without proper application of mind, and the court must consider the gravity of the offence and the legislative mandate. Therefore, while an appeal for a lesser sentence is possible in exceptional cases with proper justification, it is not permissible merely on grounds such as the passage of time or the possibility of the parties having married and settled in life, as these are not valid grounds under the law.Checking relevance for Kunhimuhammed@ Kunheethu VS State of Kerala...
2025 1 Supreme 324 : Yes, a convicted person can appeal for a lesser sentence under the Indian Penal Code (IPC), but such appeals are subject to strict limitations. The courts have held that when the minimum sentence for an offence is life imprisonment—such as under Section 302 IPC for murder—grounds like parity, leniency, old age, or health concerns shall not be of any aid to the accused while seeking reduction of sentence. In this case, the court explicitly rejected the appellant''''s plea based on advanced age and deteriorating health, stating that these factors alone cannot absolve or mitigate responsibility for a crime of such magnitude. The nature of the offence, its deliberate execution, and societal implications necessitate that punishment reflect the seriousness of the crime. Therefore, even though an appeal may be filed, it will only succeed if there is a compelling justification, which was absent here.
