Supreme Court: Courts Have Sometimes Failed Arbitration, With Interference Curing No Disease  ||  Supreme Court: Co-Heir Cannot Sell Other Heirs' Shares as Karta After Intestate Succession  ||  SC: Casual Labourers With Temporary Status are Eligible For Pension Even Without Regularisation  ||  Supreme Court: High Courts Must Record the Nature of Crime and Allegations While Quashing FIRs  ||  Delhi HC Rejected Pernod Ricard’s Plea Against Denial of Wholesale Liquor License over Excise Case  ||  Gujarat HC: Lalita Kumari Ruling Does Not Permit Deceased’s Kin to Invoke Art 226 For FIR Failure  ||  Ker HC: Denying Disability Pension to Army Personnel Based on Unreasoned Medical Opinion is Invalid  ||  Kerala HC Directs Family Courts to Follow Calcutta HC Custody Guidelines Till State Rules Framed  ||  Allahabad HC Allows LIC Employees to Be Engaged as Census Enumerators and Supervisors For Duties  ||  Supreme Court Unveiled Victim Protection Plan For Trafficking Survivors and Urged Legal Reforms    

Sherlock vs. Cordiner - (17 Aug 2023)

If the preconditions in Section 45(1)(a) and (b) of Sentencing Act are satisfied, the Court has a discretion, not a duty, to make a spent conviction order

Criminal

The Appellant was convicted in on a charge that, being an occupier of premises, she knowingly permitted those premises to be used for the purpose of the use or preparation of a prohibited plant, namely cannabis, contrary to Section 5(1)(a)(ii) of the Misuse of Drugs Act 1981. The Appellant seeks leave to appeal her sentence on the basis that, no spent conviction order was made.

A refusal to make an order that might be made as a result of aconviction is a decision which may be appealed.Leave to appeal must not be granted on a ground of appeal unlessthe court is satisfied that the ground of has a reasonable prospect ofsucceeding, meaning that the ground is required to have a rational andlogical prospect of succeeding.Even if a ground of appeal might be decided in favour of theAppellant, the court may dismiss the appeal if it considers that nosubstantial miscarriage of justice has occurred.

The first precondition giving rise to a discretion to make a spent conviction order is that the appellant is unlikely to commit such an offence again. The phrase 'such an offence' means an offence of a kind similar to that of which the offender has been convicted.The second precondition is that the offence was 'trivial'

An alternative basis for enlivening the discretion to make a spent conviction order is that set out in Section 45(1)(b)(ii) of Sentencing Act,1995; that the appellant is of previous good character. The appellant submitted that this precondition was made out. After consideration of the additional evidence, the Respondent did not oppose a finding that the appellant was of good character, although emphasised that the matter was one for the court to determine.If the preconditions in Section 45(1)(a) and (b) are satisfied, the court has a discretion, not a duty, to make a spent conviction order.

Present Court is not satisfied that, the Appellant's circumstances have been established to be of such a nature that the exceptional step of immediately relieving her of the consequences of her conduct should be taken. Accordingly, present Court decline to make a spent conviction order.

Tags : DISCRETION   SPENT CONVICTION   SENTENCE  

Share :        

Disclaimer | Copyright 2026 - All Rights Reserved