Centralising Criminal Sentencing In India: Discretion And Uniformity At Crossroads
- IJLLR Journal
- Jan 25
- 1 min read
Amartya Sahastranshu Singh, LLM (International Law), RGSoIPL, IIT Kharagpur
Arisia, LLM (Criminal Law), RGSoIPL, IIT Kharagpur
ABSTRACT
In India, the sentencing policy remains largely uncodified, shaped instead by judicial discretion, constitutional principles, and evolving appellate guidance. This paper situates sentencing within its statutory framework under the criminal statutes, and traces how Indian courts have moved from a predominantly reformative outlook towards a more complex balance. Against this backdrop, the paper offers an analysis of the Supreme Court’s recent decision in Kiran v. State of Karnataka, which restricts the power of Sessions Courts to impose life imprisonment without remission. While the judgment reinforces constitutional and statutory limits on sentencing, it also raises deeper questions about judicial hierarchy, decentralisation, and the logic underlying differential sentencing powers across courts. The paper critically evaluates whether sentencing authority has become increasingly centralised in higher courts and what this means for trial-level discretion. Ultimately, the paper argues for a calibrated sentencing model that preserves meaningful discretion at the trial stage while being guided by clear principles articulated by appellate courts.
Keywords: Sentencing discretion, Indian criminal justice, Life imprisonment, Judicial hierarchy, Proportionality
