By- Rhytham Jain
While deciding the case Bhagwan Narayan Gaikwad vs the state of Maharashtra, a two-judge bench of the supreme court consist of Justice Ajay Rastogi and Abhay S. Oka observed that compromise between accused and the victim cannot be the only reason to reduce their punishment awarded for any non-compoundable offenses. For such reduction in punishment, many other factors are also responsible.
In this case, a person attacked with the sword to the victim on his right leg, below the knee and it was such a brutal blow by the sword which almost led to the mutilation of that body part. After that, the injured person was not given any immediate medical help, due to which led to his death. For this case, the trial court convicted him under section 326 of IPC and sentenced him to jail for 7 years. But the high court upheld the judgment of the trial court and modified this punishment to 5 years and directed him to pay 2 lakh rupees as compensation to the family of the victim.
Then this case was appealed in the honorable supreme court of India. When an affidavit of compromises was submitted in the court in which both the parties said that they have settled their disputes amicably and now their family relations got smoothen and that incident happened due to some misunderstanding. Giving the judgment on the compromise affidavit, the bench of the supreme court observed that the statement of fact made by both the parties is superfluous in mechanical form and nothing can be found about their earlier relations and what kind of such smoothen family relations have been developed, all such facts are completely irrelevant and missing or stereotyped. Summarizing the judgment, the honorable supreme court noted that the victim has been crippled for life and he became a permanently disabled person. Such brutality cannot be ignored at any cost which is not only against the individual but the crime is against
About The Author
