Calling the Situation Grim, the Supreme Court Takes Suo Motu Cognizance of Delays in NCLT Approvals  ||  Supreme Court: Admission of a Claim by a Resolution Professional is Not Debt Acknowledgment  ||  Supreme Court: Public Figures Must Exercise Caution as Their Words Have Consequences in Society  ||  SC: State Must Act as a Model Employer, Criticising the Union For Not Regularising ISRO Workers  ||  J&K&L High Court: Minor Minerals Have Major Environmental Impacts and Must be Regulated  ||  Del HC: Unexplained Money Received by Public Servant is Not Bribery Without Proof of Official Favour  ||  Del HC: There is No Absolute Bar on Granting Co-Convicts Parole/Furlough Together in Suitable Cases  ||  Bom HC: LARR Authority Can Examine Limitation Issues in Land Acquisition References under 2013 Act  ||  MP HC: Long-Serving Employees Cannot Be Denied Regularisation by Retrospective Statutory Amendments  ||  J&K&L HC: Routine Challenges to Lok Adalat Awards Defeat Their Purpose of Quick Dispute Resolution    

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