Report No. 156

Clause 20

12.15. Under this clause the words "imprisonment for 20 years", are sought to be substituted by the words "rigorous imprisonment for 20 years". This is necessary, in view of some of the judgment as discussed in Chapter II.

Clause 21

12.16. By virtue of this clause, sections 64 and 65 are to be substituted by revised sections. These revised sections provide for the sentence to be imposed in default for payment of fine etc., and the amendments are incidental and they maybe carried out.

Clause 22

12.17. In view of the revised sections 64 and 65, section 66 may be omitted.

Clause 23

12.18. Under this clause section 67 and 68 are sought to be substituted by the revised sections providing for Imposing imprisonment for default of payment of fine In case of offence punishable with fine only. In the amended sections it may be included.

Clause 24

12.19. Under this clause the existing section 69 providing for termination of imprisonment on payment of proportional part of fine is sought to be omitted. This omission is necessary in view of the new revised section 68.

Clause 25

12.20. Under this clause the existing sections 70, 71 and 72 providing for the limitation of time for levy of fine and limit of punishment in case made of several offences are sought to be substituted by revised sections. The revised sections are comprehensive on these aspects and the amendments may be carried out.

Clause 26

12.21. Under this clause sections 73 and 74 providing for solitary confinement by way of punishment is sought to be omitted. In earlier Reports the Law Commission has observed that this punishment is out of tune with the modem thinking. Therefore, it has to be omitted as solitary confinement cannot be one of the general punishments under the statute like I.P.C.. It may be necessary in case of indiscipline in the jail for which the prison laws may provide for. Therefore, it is necessary to omit these two sections.