Chapter XXIX
Section 377 CrPC: Appeal by the State Government against sentence
New Law Update (2024)
Section 422 BNSS
TRIAL COURT
Punishment
Procedural – Investigation / Inquiry
Cognizable?
Bailable?
Compoundable?
Bare Act Text
(1) Save as otherwise provided in sub-section (2), the State Government may, in any case of conviction on a trial held by any Court other than a High Court, direct the Public Prosecutor to present an appeal to the—
(a) Court of Session, if the sentence is passed by a Magistrate;
(b) High Court, if the sentence is passed by any other Court,
on the ground of inadequacy of the sentence.
(2) If such conviction is in a case in which the offence has been investigated by the Delhi Special Police Establishment, constituted under the Delhi Special Police Establishment Act, 1946 (25 of 1946), or by any other agency empowered to make investigation into an offence under any Central Act other than this Code, the Central Government may also direct the Public Prosecutor to present an appeal to the High Court against the sentence on the ground of its inadequacy.
(3) When an appeal has been filed against the sentence on the ground of its inadequacy, the High Court shall not enhance the sentence except after giving to the accused a reasonable opportunity of showing cause against such enhancement and while showing cause, the accused may plead for his acquittal or for the reduction of the sentence.
(4) When an appeal has been filed against a sentence passed under section 376, section 376A, section 376AB, section 376B, section 376C, section 376D, section 376DA, section 376DB or section 376E of the Indian Penal Code, the appeal shall be disposed of within a period of six months from the date of filing of such appeal.
Important Sub-Sections Explained
Section 377(1) CrPC
This sub-section empowers the State Government, through its Public Prosecutor, to file an appeal against a conviction where the sentence awarded by any court other than the High Court is considered inadequate. It specifies whether the appeal goes to the Court of Session or the High Court based on the original sentencing court.
Section 377(3) CrPC
This crucial sub-section protects the rights of an accused when the High Court is considering enhancing their sentence in an appeal. It mandates that the accused must be given a fair chance to explain why the sentence should not be increased, and they can even request acquittal or a reduction in the existing sentence.
Landmark Judgements
State of Rajasthan v. Kishore (2012):
The Supreme Court clarified that the State Government’s power to appeal against an inadequate sentence is not restricted to cases where the inadequacy is ‘manifest’ but extends to all cases where the sentence is found to be inadequate upon a proper appreciation of facts and law, emphasizing the State’s role in ensuring justice.
State of U.P. v. Ram Swarup (1974):
The Supreme Court held that while exercising its revisional or appellate powers for enhancement of sentence, the High Court should not interfere unless the sentence is ‘manifestly inadequate.’ It also underscored the importance of giving due consideration to the reasons provided by the trial court for the sentence imposed.