In State of M.P. v. Sangram and Ors. AIR 2006 SC 48 a three-Judge
Bench of this Court remanded the matter to the High Court for fresh
disposal without going into the merits of the case, when it found that the
High Court had reduced a sentence for an offence under Section 307 IPC from
seven years rigorous imprisonment to the period already undergone (ten
months and five days) by a short and cryptic judgment:
13. This Court in State of M.P. v. Sangram and Others (AIR 2006 SC 48)
took strong exception in the manner in which the High Court, while
disposing of the criminal appeal, reduced the sentence without application
of mind. That was also a case where the accused was charge-sheeted for
offence punishable under Section 307 IPC. The trial Court imposed the
sentence of seven years rigorous imprisonment, which was reduced by the
High Court to one year, without stating any satisfactory reasons for
reduction of sentence. This Court held as follows:
In State of M.P. v. Sangram and Ors. AIR 2006 SC 48 a three-Judge
Bench of this Court remanded the matter to the High Court for fresh
disposal without going into the merits of the case, when it found that the
High Court had reduced a sentence for an offence under Section 307 IPC from
seven years rigorous imprisonment to the period already undergone (ten
months and five days) by a short and cryptic judgment:
On a perusal of the letter, time as prayed for is extended and learned trial
Court is granted further time of four months to dispose off S.T. No.112/2018
(State M.P. Vs. Mayank @ Sangram and others ) from the date of receipt of copy
of this order.