Death case:SC to examine issue of summary dismissal of appeals (Madhya Pradesh)

Jul 10, 2017, 08:58 PM IST

The Supreme Court today said it will examine the challenge to its rule which allows summary dismissal of appeals in death row cases and whether the convicts can approach it after exhausting all legal remedies.

The apex court directed death row convict Babu alias Ketan and another seeking a stay on their hanging to first file a review petition against their sentence of capital punishment, after which the larger issue will be decided. A bench headed by Justices Dipak Misra and comprising Justices A M Khanwilkar and M M Shantanagoudar said it was keeping the petition pending till the disposal of the review petition. Senior advocate Gopal Subramanium said the larger issue that has been challenged was the Supreme Court rules which allow summary dismissal of appeals of death row convicts.

The apex court had on June 22 posted the matter for hearing by a three-judge bench to decide whether death row convicts can approach it again, challenging their proposed hanging even after exhausting all the legal remedies. Mercy petitions of Babu alias Ketan have already been rejected by President Pranab Mukherjee on May 25. Babu alias Ketan and Sanni alias Devendra were awarded death sentence along with another person by a Indore court in Madhya Pradesh for rape and murder of a four-year-old girl in 2012. The sentence was upheld by the Madhya Pradesh High Court in 2014 and by the apex court on January 6, 2015. The convicts had kidnapped the child from outside her relative's house in Indore, sexually assaulted her, then strangled her to death and dumped the body in a drain. 

(This article has not been edited by DNA's editorial team and is auto-generated from an agency feed.) 

Source: https://www.dnaindia.com/india/report-death-casesc-to-examine-issue-of-summary-dismissal-of-appeals-2497705 (Accessed 23 December 2018)

Larger bench to hear plea of death row convicts: SC

New Delhi, Jun 22 (PTI) The Supreme Court today said that a three-judge bench would decide whether death row convicts can approach it again challenging their proposed hanging even after exhausting all their legal remedies.

A vacation bench comprising justices D Y Chandrachud and S K Kaul fixed after summer holidays the pleas of death row convict Babu alias Ketan and another seeking a stay on their hanging. Senior advocate Salman Khurshid sought urgent hearing on the plea saying that their mercy petitions have already been rejected by President Pranab Mukherjee on May 25 and death warrants could be issued anytime. The bench responded by saying that the moment such petitions are filed in the apex court by the condemned prisoners, the prison authorities are intimated by the registry about such filing, ruling out the possibility of execution.

Dealing with legal aspects, the court said that in the past, three-judges bench has been hearing such matters which include the question as to whether such convicts can file fresh writ petitions against the capital punishment after the dismissal of their appeals, reviews and curative pleas by the apex court. Khurshid said that the convicts have challenged the Supreme Court rules which permit summary dismissal of appeals of convicts in death row cases. Babu alias Ketan and Sanni alias Devendra were awarded death sentence along with another person by a Indore court in Madhya Pradesh for rape and murder of a four-year-old girl in 2012.

The sentence was upheld by the Madhya Pradesh High Court in 2014 and by the apex court on January 6, 2015. The convicts had kidnapped the child from outside her relative’s house in Indore. They then sexually assaulted her, strangled her to death and dumped the body in a drain.

This is published unedited from the PTI feed.

Source: https://www.india.com/news/agencies/larger-bench-to-hear-plea-of-death-row-convicts-sc-2260567/ (Accessed 23 December 2018)

SC puts on hold child rapist-murderer's death sentence (Maharashtra)

Feb 11, 2016 00:04:03 IST

New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Wednesday put on hold the execution of the death sentence of Vasanta Sampat Dupare who had sought recall of its verdict upholding his conviction and death sentence for raping and stoning to death a four-year-old girl in Maharashtra in 2008. 

An apex court bench of Justice Dipak Misra, Justice Rohinton Fali Nariman and Justice Uday Umesh Lalit agreed to hear the review plea by the 55-year-old death row convict as his counsel submitted that the lower court had not properly examined the additional evidences and the related exhibits in the course of the trial. Putting on hold the death sentence, the bench told his counsel to satisfy it as to how its earlier judgment, sought to be recalled, was wrong. A bench headed by Justice Misra had on November 26, 2014 had rejected Dupare's plea challenging the Bombay High court decision upholding his death penalty. 

The apex court while upholding the death sentence had said "the rape of a minor child is nothing but a monstrous burial of her dignity in darkness. It is a crime against the holy body of a girl child and the soul of the society and such a crime is aggravated by the manner in which it has been committed".

Source: https://www.firstpost.com/india/sc-puts-on-hold-child-rapist-murderers-death-sentence-2620824.html (Accessed 20 December 2018)

1993 Mumbai blasts: Death row convict Yakub Memon could be hanged on 30 July 2015

The only convict sentenced to death for his alleged involvement in the 1993 serial blasts in Mumbai, Yakub Memon, is reportedly set to be hanged on 30 July subject to the apex court hearing his plea for mercy days earlier. According to a DNA report, the 53-year-old convict could be hanged as the result of a Tada (Terrorism and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act) court issued a warrant to carry out the sentence as per which he is scheduled to be executed on 30 July at 7 am in the Nagpur Central Jail. The report said that Memon has moved a petition in the Supreme Court hoping to stay the execution, but for now, the state government has given its sanction for the execution and in keeping with procedure his family has also been informed of the impending hanging.

Yakub Memon

On 10 April, the Supreme Court had rejected a petition filed by Memon seeking to stay the death sentence. Memon, a former chartered accountant, is the brother of the prime accused in the case Tiger Memon. Earlier on March 21, 2013, the apex court had upheld the death sentence of Memon. The multiple blasts had claimed 257 lives and left 713 injured. CBI, which probed the blasts, had alleged that the conspiracy was hatched by Dawood Ibrahim and other absconding persons, including Yakub's brother Tiger Memon, who is believed to be hiding in Pakistan.

The court had commuted the death penalty awarded by a special TADA court to 10 others, who had planted RDX explosives-laden vehicles at various places in Mumbai, to life term by distinguishing their roles from that of Memon. Yakub, who owned an export firm allegedly handled his brother, gangster Tiger Memon’s, funds. He was accused of having funded the training of 15 youths who were sent to Pakistan for training in the use of arms and ammunition and funding the escape of the family following the blasts. The Memon family, including Yakub, had fled Mumbai before the blasts. After reportedly meeting with a family lawyer in Kathmandu in July 1994, Yakub was set to return to Karachi after being told that he was unlikely to get much mercy if he did surrender to Indian authorities.

But his being caught with multiple passports at the Kathmandu airport set off a chain of events that resulted in all the other members of the Memon family also being brought to India. His arrest remains controversial. Officially Yakub was arrested on the morning of 5 August 1994, inexplicably from the New Delhi railway station, far away from Pakistan or Dubai where the Memon family was said to be in hiding. The mercy plea of Memon had earlier been rejected by President Pranab Mukherjee on 21 May, 2014. The decision had been taken by the President following recommendations of the Maharashtra government and the Home Ministry that the mercy petition of Memon be rejected.

Updated Date: Jul 15, 2015 14:58 PM

Source: https://www.firstpost.com/india/1993-mumbai-blasts-death-row-convict-yakub-memon-could-be-hanged-on-30-july-2342974.html (Accessed on 18 December 2018)

Her crime a blow to society's faith in educated daughter as caregiver: SC

Updated: May 18, 2015 17:42 IST

LEGAL CORRESPONDENT

Calling it an abhorrent crime of parricide shaking the Indian society's aspirations of an educated daughter as a caregiver more responsible than a son, the Supreme Court confirmed the death penalty of a young teacher and her lover for the murder of her aged parents and five other family members.

The case dealt with the multiple murders committed by Shabnam, a teacher in Uttar Pradesh, in 2008.

She had incapacitated her entire family by sedating them. Then had held their heads while her lover slit their throats, one after the other. The Supreme Court judgment quotes the prosecution saying that she strangled her 10-month-old nephew with her own hands. After the deed, she pretended to lie down unconscious near her dead father till the neighbours broke into the house.

The court confirmed that she wanted to do away with her family, who was opposed to her relationship, and keep the family property to herself. A trial court convicted and sentenced the duo to death in July 2008. The decision was upheld by the Allahabad High Court in April 2013.

In its recent judgment on their appeals, a Bench led by Chief Justice of India H.L. Dattu said the fact that an educated teacher from a civilised family committed this crime and showed no remorse by itself makes it a 'rarest of rare' crime deserving the death penalty.

“Such a deed as parricide would be sufficiently appalling were the perpetrator and the victims are uneducated and backward, but it gains a ghastly illumination from the descent, moral upbringing, and elegant respectful living of the educated family where the father and daughter are both teachers,” Chief Justice Dattu said.

“Here is a case in which Shabnam, who has been brought up in an educated and independent environment by her family and was respectfully employed as a Shikshamitra (teacher) at the school, influenced by the love and lust of her paramour has committed this brutal parricide exterminating seven lives including that of an innocent child,” the judgment said.

Justifying its decision to uphold her death sentence, the apex court distinguished Shabnam's crime triggered intense indignation in the community as it shattered the modern Indian parents' faith that their educated daughter would care for them in their old age.

“The modern era, led by the dawn of education, no longer recognises the stereotype that a parent would want a son so that they have someone to look after them and support them in their old age. Now, in an educated and civilised society, a daughter plays a multifaceted and indispensible role in the family, especially towards her parents,” the court said.

The court said the accused “wrench the heart of our society where family is an institution of love and trust”. It concluded that the couple's cold-blooded depravity leaves little “little likelihood of reform”.

Source: http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/death-penalty-for-teacher-who-killed-parents-and-family/article7219753.ece [last accessed 28.05.2015]

Center Seeks Review of SC Ruling on Death Sentence

By Press Trust of India Mar 01, 2014 NEW DELHI, India

The center on Saturday moved the Supreme Court seeking review of its verdict holding that undue delay by the government in deciding mercy pleas can be grounds for commuting death sentences. The center submitted that the January 21 judgment, by which 15 condemned prisoners were granted life and paved the way for similar relief for Rajiv Gandhi killers, is “patently illegal, (and) suffers from errors apparent.”

 It said such an important issue should have been heard by a Constitution bench and the judgment passed by a three-judge bench was without “jurisdiction.” “It is respectfully submitted that the impugned judgment is patently illegal, suffers from errors apparent on the face of the record and flies in the face of well-established principles of law laid down by this court and contained in the Constitution and other statutes,” the review petition said. “It is submitted that in the present case, the issue raised was that of the commutation of the death sentence to life imprisonment on the ground of delay, which allegedly attracted Article 21 (right to life) in favor of the convicts.

 “Therefore, it involved a substantial issue of interpretation of the Constitution and ought to have been heard by a bench of five judges, as mandated under Article 145 of the Constitution,” it said.

Source: http://www.indiawest.com/news/17277-center-seeks-review-of-sc-ruling-on-death-sentence.html [accessed 24 April 2014]

Larger bench of SC to hear pleas of death row convicts

Press Trust of India | Posted on Jul 26, 2013 at 06:26pm IST

New Delhi: A larger bench of the Supreme Court will hear from October 22 a batch of petitions seeking commutation of their death sentence into life imprisonment on account of delay in carrying out the execution following the dismissal of their mercy petitions by the President.
"Death sentence matters will be taken up immediately after the Dussehra holidays from October 22," a bench, comprising Chief Justice P Sathasivam and Justice Ranjan Gogoi, said.
Before taking over as the CJI, Justice Sathasivam had said that there was a need for "authoritative pronouncements" by a larger bench or a Constitution Bench on issues like mercy pleas to avoid conflicting views by smaller benches.

The hearing by a larger bench assumes significance as on April 12, a two-judge bench had held that long delay in disposing off mercy pleas by the President or the Governor of persons convicted under anti-terror laws or similar statutes cannot be a ground for commutation of death sentence. The ruling was pronounced while rejecting the plea of Khalistani terrorist and death row convict Devinderpal Singh Bhullar.
When the April 12 judgement was delivered, there were over 20 convicts facing execution. Later on, an apex court bench had granted relief to a condemned prisoner M N Das who had sought conversion of his death sentence to life imprisonment on the ground of delay in deciding his mercy plea.
On February 18 this year, a bench headed by Justice Sathasivam, which in an urgent hearing had stayed the execution of death sentence of sandalwood smuggler Veerapan's associates in a Karnataka jail, had said it would wait for the Bhullar's case judgement before dealing with other identical petitions.
It had stayed the execution of death sentence of Veerappan's elder brother Gnanaprakash and his aides Simon, Meesekar Madaiah and Bilavendran.
The outcome of the hearing before a larger bench will also have its bearing on three persons Murgan, Santhan and Perarivalan who are awaiting execution after conviction under TADA in the Rajiv Gandhi assassination case. A bench headed by Justice Sathasivam had on April 6 stayed the execution of eight more death row prisoners, convicted in different murder cases, whose clemency pleas were rejected by President Pranab Mukherjee.
The eight convicts facing death row in different cases are Suresh, Ramji, Gurmeet Singh, Praveen Kumar, Sonia and her
husband Sanjeev, Sundar Singh and Jafar Ali. The apex court had passed the orders on the plea of either the convicts or civil rights group and public spirited persons who had filed the petitions on behalf of the death row persons.
In its petition, Peoples Union of Democratic Rights (PUDR) had challenged the rejection of the mercy pleas of the eight convicts contending there has been delay in carrying out their execution even after it was confirmed by the apex court.
While Suresh, Ramji, Gurmeet Singh and Jafar Ali are lodged in prisons in Uttar Pradesh, former Haryana MLA Ralu
Ram Punia's daughter Sonia and her husband Sanjeev are jailed in Haryana. Praveen is in a Karnataka jail and Sundar Singh is
an inmate in a prison in Uttaranchal. Sonia and Sanjeev were awarded death penalty for killing eight members of her family, including her parents and three children of her brother, in 2001.
Gurmeet Singh was convicted for killing 13 of his family members in 1986. Jafar Ali murdered his wife and five daughters. Suresh and Ramji killed five of their relatives. 

Source : http://ibnlive.in.com/news/larger-bench-of-sc-to-hear-pleas-of-death-row-convicts/409628-3.html
 

Death penalty for Maya Kodnani: SIT moves SC against Gujarat govt's withdrawal of consent

Saeed Khan, TNN Jun 27, 2013, 03.24PM IST

AHMEDABAD: After Gujarat government withdrew its consent to seek death penalty for former minister Maya Kodnani and others in the Naroda Patia massacre case, the Supreme Court-appointed SIT has made a representation before the Supreme Court and questioned the reason put forth by the government.
The state government suspended its consent given to the SIT to seek enhancement of punishment for Kodnani, Babu Bajrangi and eight others, who were sentenced to 28 years and 31 years respectively for their active roles in killing of 97 persons on February 28, 2002.
The SIT on its own cannot move the high court to question the trial court order or even to seek higher punishment for convicts. It requires the state government to file the appeal and the SIT can join in the proceeding later. The government consented the SIT to seek higher punishment for Kodnani and others more than seven months after pronouncement of verdict by the special court. The SIT appointed prosecutors also and prepared for filing an appeal, but the government asked SIT to suspend the process on the pretext that it was still seeking advocate general's opinion in this matter.
In its application, the SIT has submitted before the SC that the state government has claimed that it has sought the opinion of advocate general on whether death penalty could be sought for Kodnani and others. But the advocate general's opinion can be sought only in case of challenging acquittal, and the top legal officer is not even entitled to opine on the issue of death penalty, said a senior SIT official.
The official also said that the SIT moved the SC during the vacation and it may take a little long before the issue is discussed in the apex court, since this issue will be taken up by the larger bench that looks into this case. "We are waiting for the bench to sit and take up the case, but since it is a larger bench, the judges do not sit together frequently," the officer said adding that the SIT is confident that the apex court would ask the state government not to create such hurdles in judicial proceeding.
On August 29 last year, special judge Jyotsna Yagnik sentenced 32 to life imprisonment in the Naroda Patia case. Since then, the appeals are not filed by the government, though stipulated time for it is just 90 days. 

Source : http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2013-06-27/india/40232272_1_maya-kodnani-babu-bajrangi-apex-court

 

Devenderpal Singh Bhullar's wife moves SC for suspending his execution

PTI | May 7, 2013, 01.56PM IST
NEW DELHI: 1993 Delhi blast convict Devinderpal Singh Bhullar's wife on Tuesday approached the Supreme Court seeking stay on execution of his death sentence till her review plea against its verdict is decided.

She submitted in her plea that she has filed a review petition against the Supreme Court verdict of April 12 in which the court had rejected her petition to commute his death sentence to life imprisonment on ground of delay on the part of the government in deciding his mercy plea.

Khalistan Liberation Force (KLF) terrorist Bhullar was convicted and awarded death penalty for triggering a bomb blast here in September 1993, killing nine people and injuring 25 others, including then Youth Congress president M S Bitta.

The apex court had on March 26, 2002 dismissed Bhullar's appeal against the death sentence awarded by a trial court in August 2001 and endorsed by the Delhi high court in 2002.

He had filed a review petition which was also dismissed on December 17, 2002. Bhullar had then moved a curative petition which too had been rejected by the apex court on March 12, 2003.

Bhullar, meanwhile, had filed a mercy petition before the President on January 14, 2003. The President, after a lapse of over eight years, dismissed his mercy plea on May 25, 2011.

Citing his delay, he had again moved the apex court for commutation of the death sentence but his plea was rejected.

The apex court had on May one commuted the death sentence awarded to murder convict M N Das, whose mercy petition was rejected by then President Pratibha Patil.

The court had allowed the plea of Das who had approached it for commutation of his death sentence on the ground that the President had taken twelve years to decide his mercy plea.

Source : http://m.timesofindia.com/india/Devenderpal-Singh-Bhullars-wife-moves-SC-for-suspending-his-execution/articleshow/19928452.cms

Is 14 years imprisonment an alternative to death penalty? SC asks

Dhananjay Mahapatra,TNN | Apr 20, 2013
NEW DELHI: Is life sentence, which generally translates to 14 years in prison, a good alternative to death penalty in heinous and gruesome murders which fall just short of being categorized 'rarest of rare" to invite the extreme punishment?

This question from the Supreme Court related to those cases where trial courts impose death penalty but higher courts, after scrutinizing the evidence afresh, find that the case falls just short of being bracketed under 'rarest of rare' category not warranting award of capital punishment.

A bench of Justices P Sathasivam and M Y Eqbal was confronted with this question in the case where one Sahib Hussain was found guilty of murdering five persons and was awarded death penalty by a Rajasthan court. The high court commuted the death penalty to life imprisonment with a rider that it would not be less than 20 years in prison.

Justice Sathasivam, writing the judgment for the bench, upheld the 20-year sentence but found that in a recent judgment (Sangeet vs Haryana), the SC had criticized award of sentences ranging between 20 years and 35 years in gruesome murder cases which fell outside the purview of 'rarest of rare' tag by a whisker.

In that judgment, the apex court had said it was impermissible for courts to limit the power of the government to grant parole or remission to convicts sentenced to life. In most cases of life imprisonment, convicts, on showing good conduct, get entitled to remission and are let out after spending 14 years in jail.

The bench of Justices Sathasivam and Eqbal said the judgment criticizing higher courts for awarding sentences ranging between 20 years and 35 years as an alternative to death penalty was unwarranted, given the fact that state governments had granted remission without adequate reasons or even on flimsy grounds.

"It is clear that since more than a decade, in many cases, whenever death sentence has been commuted to life imprisonment where the offence alleged is serious in nature, while awarding life imprisonment, this court reiterated minimum years of imprisonment of 20 years or 25 years or 30 years or 35 years, mentioning thereby, if the appropriate government wants to give remission, the same has to be considered only after the expiry of the said period," the bench said.

The bench supported its reasoning with the Swami Shradhananda judgment, in which the apex court in 2008 had said, "When an appellant comes to this court carrying a death sentence awarded by the trial court and confirmed by the high court, this court may find that the case just falls short of the rarest of rare category and may feel somewhat reluctant in endorsing the death sentence.

"But at the same time, having regard to the nature of the crime, the court may strongly feel that a sentence of life imprisonment subject to remission normally works out to a term of 14 years and would be grossly inadequate."

It had further said, "What then should the court do? If the court's option is limited only to two punishments, one a sentence of imprisonment, for all intents and purposes of not more than 14 years, and the other death, the court may feel tempted to find itself nudged into endorsing the death penalty. Such a course would be disastrous.

"A far more just, reasonable and proper course would be to expand the options and to take over what, as a matter of fact, lawfully belongs to the court, that is the vast hiatus between 14 years' imprisonment and death. It needs to be emphasized that the court would take recourse to the expanded option primarily because in the facts of the case, the sentence of 14 years imprisonment would amount to no punishment at all." The court had ordered that Shradhananda would not be released from jail.

Source : http://m.timesofindia.com/india/Is-14-years-imprisonment-an-alternative-to-death-penalty-SC-asks/articleshow/19642922.cms

Rape convict Dharampal not to be hanged till may 6

Express news service : Chandigarh | Wed Apr 10 2013 The Punjab and Haryana High Court on Wednesday extended stay on the execution of rape-murder convict Dharampal till May 6. He was to be hanged on April 15.

Stating that he was already acquitted by the High Court in the rape case on the basis of which he was given death sentence by the Supreme Court, Dharampal today demanded commutation of his death sentence.

In an interim relief for Dharampal, the High Court on April 7 had stayed his execution till April 10. This came a day after Haryana DGP (Prison) Sharad Kumar said that Dharampal would be executed on April 15 in Ambala jail, where he has been shifted from Rohtak.

Though jail authorities had said that Dharampal would be hanged on April 15, apprehending an early hanging, his counsel Advocate Navkiran Singh had moved the high court. Saturday being a holiday, a special request was made before the Chief Justice, who asked two high court judges to hold a special division bench.

During the hearing of the case, Singh had referred to a Supreme Court judgment, which had held that a condemned prisoner has the right to demand commutation of his death sentence to life imprisonment if there has been a substantial delay in adjudication of his mercy petition.

Singh had added that if the competent authority, the President, causes delay in deciding the mercy petition of a convict, the latter should not be harassed further and should be given life imprisonment. The delay, he had added, is counted from the day the Supreme Court dismisses the appeal of a convict and orders his hanging. In Dharampal’s case, his hanging was upheld 14 years ago.

Following this, the court had asked the DGP (Prisons) to respond to Dharampal’s petition by April 10.

In 1991, Dharampal was sentenced to 10-year imprisonment for raping a girl in Sonepat. After his release on parole in 1993, Dharampal along with his brother, Nirmal, murdered the girl, her father, mother and two brothers when they were sleeping at their house.

Dharmapal and Nirmal were sentenced to death by a Sessions Court on May 5, 1997 and it was retained by the Punjab and Haryana High Court on September 29, 1998. However, the Supreme Court converted Nirmal’s death penalty to life imprisonment but Dharampal’s death sentence was retained.

His mercy petition was rejected by the Union Home Minister in 2000. Later, Dharampal filed a mercy plea to the President in 2005, which was rejected after about eight years.

Navkiran had also referred to a case filed by terrorist Devinder Pal Singh Bhullar, who had moved the Supreme Court demanding that his death sentence be converted to life since there has been delay in adjudication of his mercy petition. The case stands reserved for final orders by the Supreme Court.

Source : http://m.indianexpress.com/news/rape-convict-dharampal-not-to-be-hanged-till-may-6/1100296/