STATE TIMES NEWS
JAMMU: After convicting a judicial officer for rape and cheating of a woman who had sought legal help from him in 2018, Presiding Officer Fast Track Court, Khalil Choudhary awarded 17 years imprisonment to accused Rajesh Kumar Abrol on Saturday.
While awarding imprisonment, Presiding Officer Khalil Choudhary after hearing APP Suresh Sharma for the UT observed that it is not only the duty of the court, but social and legal obligation are clearly enjoined upon it to impose adequate punishment according to law while taking into consideration not only in the crime, but also the criminal. Furthermore, deterrence and reformation arc primarily social goals. “It is the duty of the court to impose adequate sentence, for one of the purposes of the requisite sentence is protection of the society and legitimate response to its collectively concise. The paramount principle that should be the guiding laser beam is that the punishment should be proportionate. It is answer of the law to the social concise. In a way, it is an obligation to the society which has reposed confidence arid faith in the judicial system of the country to curtail the evil while imposing the sentence. It is court’s accountability to remind itself about its role and reverence for rule of law. It must evince rationalized judicial discretion and not an individual perception or a moral propensity. But, if in an ultimate eventuate the proper sentence is not awarded; the fundamental grammar of sentencing is guillotined. Law cannot tolerate it. Society does not withstand it and sanctity of concise abhors,” the court observed.
With these observations, the Court directed accused to undergo simple imprisonment for seven years for commission of offence under Section 420 of RPC and a fine of Rs 20,000 (rupees twenty thousand) and rigorous imprisonment for ten years for commission of the offence under Section 376 (2) K RPC and a fine of Rs 50,000 (rupees fifty thousand) and in default of the payment of fines, the convict has to undergo further imprisonment for a period of three months in each offence. “The period of detention of the convict during investigation and trial of this case shall be set off against the sentence awarded to the convict. Both sentences shall run concurrently and copy of this order be provided to the convict free of cost at once,” the Court directed.