Abdul Jabbar vs. State of Haryana [February 05, 2024]
Abdul Jabbar, along with three others, was prosecuted for offences under Sections 452, 323/34, and 325/34 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) relating to an incident in 2010. The case arose from an altercation that resulted in injuries to the complainant, leading to charges of voluntarily causing hurt and grievous hurt in furtherance of common intention.
Trial Court Proceedings
The Chief Judicial Magistrate, Nuh, Haryana, convicted Abdul Jabbar for:
Section 323/34 IPC (voluntarily causing hurt with common intention): 3 months’ imprisonment.
Section 325/34 IPC (voluntarily causing grievous hurt with common intention): 1 year’s imprisonment and a fine of ₹500.
Appellate Proceedings
The conviction and sentence were upheld by the Additional Sessions Judge, Nuh.
On further appeal, the Punjab & Haryana High Court partially allowed the revision: it maintained the conviction but reduced the sentence for Section 325/34 IPC from 1 year to 3 months, increasing the fine to ₹5,000, citing the inordinate delay of nearly 13 years in the trial.
Supreme Court Proceedings
Abdul Jabbar appealed to the Supreme Court, highlighting that he had already undergone about one month and three days of imprisonment and that the prolonged trial had caused significant hardship.
The Supreme Court considered the totality of circumstances, especially the 13-year delay since the incident and the time already served in custody.
The Court emphasized the principle of proportionality in sentencing, particularly in cases of excessive delay and minor custodial periods already undergone.
Judgment
The Supreme Court allowed the appeal in part, modifying the sentence to the period already undergone (about one month and three days), while upholding the conviction under Sections 323/34 and 325/34 IPC.
The application seeking to declare the appellant a juvenile at the time of the offence was dismissed as unnecessary, given the sentence reduction.
All pending applications were disposed of, and no order as to costs was made.
Significance
This judgment reiterates the Supreme Court’s approach to proportionality in sentencing, especially where there is a significant delay in the justice process and the accused has already suffered the consequences of a protracted trial. The Court balanced the need for punishment with considerations of fairness and the realities of delayed justice.
Citation:
Abdul Jabbar vs. State of Haryana, [2024] 2 S.C.R. 162; 2024 INSC 99, Supreme Court of India, decided on February 5, 2024.
RELATED Blog
0 comments