Delhi HC issues notice in plea to make offences punishable by ten years or more triable by Sessions Courts

The Delhi High Court has issued notice in a plea seeking directions to the Central Government to make offences under Sections 326, 327, 363A, 377, 382, 386, 389, 392, 394, 409, 455, 458, 467, 493, 495 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) triable by Sessions Courts instead of Courts of Judicial Magistrate of First Class in order to secure the maximum punishment for these offences..Some of the offences covered by the Sections are voluntarily causing grievous hurt by dangerous weapons or means (Sec 326), kidnapping or maiming a minor for purposes of begging (Sec 363A), punishment for robbery (Sec 392), unnatural offences (Sec 377), and cohabitation caused by a man deceitfully inducing a belief of lawful marriage (Sec 493)..Notice was issued to the Central Government by a Division Bench of Justices Siddharth Mridul and Anu Malhotra, seeking its response to the plea by petitioner Amit Sahni..It is the petitioner’s case that although IPC prescribes a prison sentence of ten years to life for offences under the above Sections, there is no provision in the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) that empowers the magistrate to impose the maximum sentence prescribed under the IPC..This is because as per Schedule I of CrPC, the offences under the above provisions are triable by a Metropolitan Magistrate/Judicial Magistrate First Class who can award a sentence of upto 3 years only in terms of Section 29 (2) CrPC, the petition explains..The magistrate may refer the matter to the Chief Judicial Magistrate/Chief Metropolitan Magistrate under Section 325 CrPC in case it is felt that 3 years punishment is not sufficient in any particular case. However, the CJM/CMM can only award a sentence of upto 7 years’ imprisonment as provided in terms of Section 29(1) of CrPC..The petitioner thus claims that Schedule I of the CrPC, insofar as it makes the aforementioned sections of the IPC triable by a magistrate, is ultra vires Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India..The petitioner further urges the Court to direct the Central Government to rectify this “inherent lacuna in the procedural law” – which defeats the object of substantive law – by bringing an amendment to Schedule-I of CrPC. It is sought that these Sections be made triable by Sessions Courts instead of Courts of Judicial Magistrate of First Class..Such an anomaly not only causes injustice to the victims, but also defeats the deterrence effect of higher sentences, the petition argues..The matter will be heard next on July 16.