Chapter-V Power of Sentencing and Exercise of Judicial Control Over the Execution of Sentence in the Prisons. Every criminal trial must come to a conclusion with a judgment, either of acquittal or conviction in terms of S.235(1) or 248 (1) of the Code. All cases of conviction have to be appropriately sentenced as per the requirements of the statute. However, before passing the order of sentence the judge is required in terms of Ss 360 and 361 of the Code to keep in mind the reformatory considerations in matters of sentencing because S. 361 and imposes a duty on the Courts to record special reasons with a view to emphasizing the reformative sentencing alternative. Furthermore, SS 235 (2) and 248(2), create an additional obligation on the Courts to hear the accused on the question of sentence. Only after the accused has been given a pre-sentence hearing, the judge is empowered to pass the appropriate sentence. The exact quantum of sentence would vary as per the nature of the offence, with the most severe form of sentence being death penalty, followed by life imprisonment, followed by term imprisonment with hard labour or without hard labour, followed by fine, followed by probation release, etc. A person sentenced to a term of imprisonment goes into prison for the execution of the sentence. Even after he/she goes into the prison, he/she is entitled to several rights and privileges pertaining to his stay inside, till his conditional or final release. Since the inmate goes into the prison as per the judicial order of both remand and sentence, what happens to him/her during the period when he/she is inside the prison becomes a matter of concern not only to the prison but also to the Court that sends him/her inside. 1. GURUBACHAN SINGH v. SATPAL SINGH a. AIR 1990 SC 209 b. Supreme Court held that exaggerated devotion to rule of benefit of doubt must not nurture fanciful doubts or lingering suspicion. 41