In any case a judge hast to see two things before awarding
punishment.
One is aggravating circumstances/factors and another one is
mitigating circumstances or factors.Aggravating circumstances/factors gives reason for severe
punishment. Mitigating circumstances or factors gives reason for leniency or
why punishment to be reduced.
The judgment by Cunha clearly shows he has given more
importance to aggravating factors and null importance to mitigating circumstances/factors.
According to Cunha the following are Aggravating factors:
1* Corruption is a serious crime
2* The manner in which assets accumulated (
According to sinha “these firms were constituted only to siphon off the
unlawful resources accumulated by A-1” (A-1:Jayalalitha)
3* A-1 is occupying a high position in the
Government of State of Tamil Nadu.
By considering Serving CM is an aggravating factor Judge
Cunha gives us reason to think that “Nobody is equal in front of Law” and not
“All are equal before the eyes of law”.
Why no mitigating factors considered?
Good Conduct:
In this Judgement Cunha rejected an important mitigating
factor. He says “The good conduct of the
accused also may not be a circumstance mitigating the gravity of the
offence". All over the world
good conduct of accused is considered as a mitigating factor in all the cases.
Even in this case her good conduct should have been considered by Cunha as a mitigating
factor. The very purpose of punishment is to reform the accused. In this case
Jayalalitha has already reformed herself.
She did not do anything bad after 1996 and her conduct is good. She was
also administrating well and brought several schemes for the well being of the
poor.
When occupying high position in government can be
considered as an aggravating factor, why good conduct while occupying high position
in government cannot be considered as a mitigating factor?
Age:
Age is another mitigating factor considered before awarding
sentence. In this case Cunha failed to consider Jayalalitha’s age which is 66
now.
One of the reason why Cunha did not consider mitigating factors
is he and current judges thinks corruption is a serious crime. Corruption is a
serious crime no doubt about that. But this should not be a sole reason to
avoid mitigating factors in providing verdict.
Keeping in mind Jayalalitha’s good conduct, age, welfare
schemes she brought to the well being of the poor Judges should show leniency
towards her.
I would like to reiterate again that the purpose of
sentence/punishment is to reform the person. In this case Jayalalitha has
already reformed herself and shows good conduct for the past 18 years. Given
all these factors in mind Judges should reduce her punishment in a way which
will not affect her political career and people of the state,who democratically elected her as CM. .