Mohammad Shafi Bhat Vs. State of J. and K.

- a.b. qadir parray, j.1. mr. shah has drawn my attention to section 276, cr. p.c. which has been incorporated in the code vide amendment no. xxxvii of 1978, which reads:-'276. judgment of acquittal or conviction :- after hearing arguments and points of law (if any), the judge shall give a judgment in the case.(2) if the accused is convicted, the judge shall, unless he proceeds in accordance with the provisions of section 562, hear the accused on the question of sentence, and then pass sentence on him according to law'.2. plain reading of sub-section (2) of said section reveals that before awarding sentence after conviction of the accused, the court of session has to hear the accused on the quantum of sentence.3. in the present case, learned sessions judge, has not followed this mandatory provision of law while awarding sentence after convicting the accused under section 5(2) of prevention of corruption act. so the appeal on this count requires acceptance. the appeal is accordingly accepted and the sentence awarded to the accused is set aside. the file is remanded back to the trial court with the direction that he will hear the person of the appellant in accordance with section 276(2) of cr. p.c. on .the quantum of sentence.