Appellate court cannot enhance convict’s sentence on its own, rules Supreme Court

The Supreme Court has ruled that an appellate court cannot, on its own, increase the punishment imposed on a convict when neither the State nor the victim or complainant has filed an appeal seeking enhancement of the sentence. The ruling came while the apex court was considering a 2007 triple-murder case involving the killing of former Calicut University vice-chancellor Malik Mohammed, his wife Katheeja Bibi and their security guard Gnanaprakasam. A Bench of Justices Manoj Misra and Vijay Bishnoi overturned the Madras High Court’s decision to modify co-convict Gopi’s punishment from ordinary life imprisonment to incarceration for the remainder of his natural life.

Convict cannot be put in worse position

The Supreme Court found that the High Court had improperly invoked its suo motu revisional powers to impose a harsher punishment on Gopi. No appeal seeking an increase in his sentence had been moved by the State, the victims or the complainant. The Bench held that when a convict approaches an appellate court, the court cannot leave him worse off by independently enhancing his punishment in the absence of a legally instituted challenge seeking such enhancement.

The distinction was significant in Gopi’s case. While a sentence of life imprisonment ordinarily extends through the convict’s natural life, the law permits remission subject to prescribed conditions. A direction that imprisonment continue for the remainder of natural life specifically eliminates the possibility of premature release through remission.

Revenge led to triple murder

According to the prosecution, the killings were triggered by a dispute involving Ambarasu, who had worked as Mohammed’s driver.

Ambarasu was removed from his job after allegedly being caught committing a fraudulent act. Prosecutors said he subsequently decided to take revenge and enlisted Gopi.

The two allegedly entered Mohammed’s house after killing security guard Gnanaprakasam. Mohammed was then murdered and the assailants fled in his vehicle, taking his wife with them.

Bibi was taken to Ongoor village in Tamil Nadu’s Viluppuram district, where the prosecution alleged that petrol and diesel were poured over her before she was set ablaze.

Her partially burnt body was recovered on November 14, 2007.

High Court had increased punishment

Following the trial, Ambarasu was sentenced to death, while Gopi was given life imprisonment.

When the matter subsequently reached the Madras High Court, it altered Gopi’s punishment and directed that he remain imprisoned for the rest of his natural life.

The Supreme Court found that this enhancement could not be sustained because there was no appeal before the High Court specifically seeking a tougher sentence for Gopi.

Sentences to run concurrently

The apex court also disagreed with the High Court’s direction requiring the sentences imposed on Gopi for different offences to operate consecutively.

It ordered instead that the sentences run concurrently.

The judgment consequently restores the original nature of Gopi’s life sentence while reaffirming limits on the powers of appellate courts when considering appeals filed by convicts against their conviction or punishment.