68 Cri.Appeals 516, 281 n 468 of 2012.odt the determination of sentences. The practice of rt punishing all serious crimes with equal severity is now unknown in civilized societies, but such a radical C ou departure from the principle of proportionality has disappeared from the law only in recent times. Even now a single grave infraction is thought to call for uniformly drastic measures. Anything less than a penalty of greatest severity for any serious crime is thought then to be a measure of toleration that is those ig h unwarranted and unwise. But in fact quite apart from considerations that make punishment unjustifiable when it is out of proportion to the crime, H uniformly disproportionate punishment has some very undesirable practical consequences.” In the case of State of Maharashtra Vs. Shatrughna ba y 83. Baban Meshram (supra) this Court following the law laid down by the Honourable Supreme Court particularly in the case of Bachan om Singh and Macchi Singh and relying upon the evidence brought on record held that the case falls in the category of rarest of rare B case and accordingly confirmed the death sentence awarded by the learned Trial Judge. 84. Reverting to the case on hand, we have given our anxious consideration to the submissions made by the learned counsel for Appellant and learned APP for the State. Keeping in view the proposition of law and guidelines laid down by the ::: Uploaded on - 08/03/2016 ::: Downloaded on - 13/03/2016 19:36:29 :::