SC takes lenient view of honour killing
Noting that the incident was 18 years old, the Supreme Court has refused to enhance the five years imprisonment punishment for three persons accused of strangulating to death their sister and her boy friend.
New Delhi: Noting that the incident was 18
years old, the Supreme Court has refused to enhance the five
years imprisonment punishment for three persons accused of
strangulating to death their sister and her boy friend Gurnam
Singh in Punjab`s Ferozpur district.
A bench of justices VS Sirpurkar and TS Thakur
refused to interfere with the Punjab and Haryana High Court
order reducing the life sentence to five years as accused
Nishan Singh and two other brothers could not control their
anger after their sister Paramjit Kaur was found in a
compromising position with her boy friend Gurnam Singh.
"It was obvious that there was a sexual intercourse
with deceased Paramjit Kaur. Again, we are not satisfied with
the explanation offered by the prosecution for delay in
sending the copy of the FIR to the Magistrate on May 16, 1993,
at 10.30 pm whereas the same was registered in the morning at
"We do not find any reason to differ with the
conclusion arrived at by the High Court that the offence was
committed due to grave and sudden provocation and would fall
under first explanation to Section 300 IPC and would amount to
culpable homicide not amounting to murder," the apex court
The order comes in the backdrop of the recent Supreme
Court suggestion for treating all honour killings as "rarest
of rare" crime and death penalty be awarded to the accused.
The bench rejected the argument of the state`s counsel
Kuldip Singh, that the five-year sentence was ridiculously
low as even according to the high court it was a case of
"The argument is undoubtedly correct. However,
considering that the incident in question took place in the
year 1993 and thus 18 years have passed.
"Further, considering the fact that the accused
persons had not even crossed the age of 25 years at the time
when the incident took place and considering the fact that
they have already undergone rigorous imprisonment for five
years and have come out of jail, we are not inclined to
interfere with the quantum of sentence and would choose to
dismiss this appeal," the bench said.