meager sentences.. counter productive in the long run

Ahmed Hussein Vali Mohammed Saiyed and Anr Vs State of Gujarat, (2009) 7 SCC 254, Hon'ble Supreme Court of India observed as 

“99.….The object of awarding appropriate sentence should be to protect the society and to deter the criminal from achieving the avowed object to law by imposing appropriate sentence. It is expected that the courts would operate the sentencing system so as to impose such sentence, which reflects the conscience of the society and the sentencing process has to be stern where it should be.

Any liberal attitude by imposing meager sentences or taking too sympathetic view merely on account of lapse of time in respect of such offences will be result-wise counter productive in the long run and against the interest of society which needs to be cared for and strengthened by string of deterrence inbuilt in the sentencing system.

100. Justice demands that courts should impose punishment befitting the crime so that the courts reflect public abhorrence of the crime. The court must not only keep in view the rights of the victim of the crime and the society at large while considering the imposition of appropriate punishment. The court will be failing in its duty if appropriate punishment is “not awarded for a crime which has been committed not only against the individual victim but also against the society to which both the criminal and the victim belong”

Just punishment is the collective cry of the society

Gopal Singh Vs State of Uttarakhand JT 2013 (3) SC 444 Hon'ble Supreme Court of India observed as 

“18. Just punishment is the collective cry of the society. While the collective cry has to be kept uppermost in the mind, simultaneously the principle of proportionality between the crime and punishment cannot be totally brushed aside. The principle of just punishment is the bedrock of sentencing in respect of a criminal offence”

sentence should reflect the crime

Hazara Singh vs Raj Kumar Hon'ble Supreme Court of India observed on 18.04.13 as

“The cardinal principle of sentencing policy is that the sentence imposed on an offender should reflect the crime he has committed and it should be proportionate to the gravity of the offence.”

“If acquittal of some co-accused casts a cloud of doubt over the entire prosecution case, the whole case may be rejected. But we fail to understand how acquittal of some of the accused can have any relevance to the question of sentence awarded to those who are convicted.”

“Mr Jain said that the High Court has enhanced the fine and compensated the injured and, therefore, we should not enhance the sentence. Accepting such a submission would mean that if your pockets can afford, commit serious crime, offer to pay heavy fine and escape entacles of law. Power of wealth need not extend to overawe court processes.”