https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=192883 Concurrent findings of fact were left undisturbed because no basis existed to reassess the evidence at the appellate stage. Sentence enhancement was set aside because a discretionary sentence cannot be increased by a bare invocation of the ends of justice; an appellate court must identify error in principle, perversity, or other legal infirmity before interfering with the trial court's sentencing discretion. The original sentence was restored. The Court also stressed that punishment must have correctional and rehabilitative aims and that prisoners retain residual fundamental rights, warranting humane treatment, protective segregation, and opportunities for improvement in custody. en-us Wed, 02 Aug 1978 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 28 Jun 2017 18:44:48 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=192883 Concurrent findings of fact were left undisturbed because no basis existed to reassess the evidence at the appellate stage. Sentence enhancement was set aside because a discretionary sentence cannot be increased by a bare invocation of the ends of justice; an appellate court must identify error in principle, perversity, or other legal infirmity before interfering with the trial court's sentencing discretion. The original sentence was restored. The Court also stressed that punishment must have correctional and rehabilitative aims and that prisoners retain residual fundamental rights, warranting humane treatment, protective segregation, and opportunities for improvement in custody. Case-Laws Indian Laws Wed, 02 Aug 1978 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=192883