SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Y.V. CHANDRACHUD, CJI., A.P. SEN AND BAHARUL ISLAM, JJ.
Kuljeet Singh alias Ranga, Petitioner
Versus
Lt. Governor, Delhi and another, Respondents.
Writ Petn. No. 8193 (A) of 1981, D/-7-11-1981.
Constitution of India, 19500 - Article, 72 and 161 - Stay execution of death sentence - Amicus curiae - Since Special Leave Petition filed by the petitioner and a Writ Petition filed by him thereafter against order of conviction and sentence have already been dismissed by us, it would be necessary to state briefly reasons why we are issuing a Rule on present Writ Petition - Who appears on behalf of petitioner, contends that power conferred by Article, 72 of Constitution on President of India to grant pardons, reprieves respites or remissions of punishment or to suspend, remit or commute sentence, especially in a case where sentence is one of death, is a power coupled with a duty which must be exercised fairly and reasonably - We do not know whether Government of India has formulated any uniform standard or guidelines by which the exercise of the costutional power under Article 72, is intended to be or is in fact governed - Held, Since question raised by Shri Garg is of far-reaching importance, particularly from the point of view of persons sentenced to death in respect of whom the President is specially empowered to exercise his power by clause (c) of Article 72 (1), it is necessary that the question must be examined with care - As a result of our staying execution of the death sentence imposed upon the aforesaid two accused, it is likely that similar petitions will be filed by others who are sentenced to death and whose petitions to President or the Governor, as case may be, for commutation of sentence have been rejected - In order to obviate necessity for such persons to approach this Court it is necessary to direct that death sentence imposed upon any person whatsoever whose petition under Article 72 or Article 161 of Constitution has been rejected by the President or the Governor, shall not be executed until the disposal of this Writ Petition - Order accordingly.
Judgment
ORDER:- Rule Nisi. We direct that the Writ Petition be placed for final hearing in the second week of January, 1982. The petitioner and the respondents will file their written submissions on or before the 4th January, 1982. We stay the execution of the death sentence imposed upon the petitioner Kuljeet Singh @ Ranga as also on the co-accused Billa. We appoint Shri R. K. Jain as amicus curiae on behalf of Billa.
2. Since the Special Leave Petition filed by the petitioner and a Writ Petition filed by him thereafter against the order of conviction and sentence have already been dismissed by us, it would be necessary to state briefly the reasons why we are issuing a Rule on the present Writ Petition.
3. Shri R. K. Garg. who appears on behalf of the petitioner, contends that the power conferred by Article, 72 of the Constitution on the President of India to grant pardons, reprieves respites or remissions of punishment or to suspend, remit or commute the sentence, especially in a case where the sentence is one of death, is a power coupled with a duty which must be exercised fairly and reasonably. We do not know whether the Government of India has formulated any uniform standard or guidelines by which the exercise of the costutional power under Article 72, is intended to be or is in fact governed. Since the question raised by Shri Garg is of far-reaching importance, particularly from the point of view of persons sentenced to death in respect of whom the President is specially empowered to exercise his power by clause (c) of Article 72 (1), it is necessary that the question must be examined with care.
4. As a result of our staying execution of the death sentence imposed upon the aforesaid two accused, it is likely that similar petitions will be filed by others who are sentenced to death and whose petitions to the President or the Governor, as the case may be, for commutation of the sentence have been rejected. In order to obviate the necessity for such persons to approach this Court. it is necessary to direct that the death sentence imposed upon any person whatsoever whose petition under Article 72 or Article 161 of the Constitution has been rejected by the President or the Governor, shall not be executed until the disposal of this Writ Petition.
Notice of this Rule will go to the Attorney General and the Union of India.
Order accordingly.
For Citation : AIR 1981 SC 2239
The main legal point established in the judgment is the binding effect of the settlement between the parties, the waiver of the right to seek re-employment by the workmen, and the entitlement of the ....
A lockout is justified if it is declared in response to an illegal strike or a strike that is in breach of a settlement or award.
The combination of eyewitness testimonies, recovery of the weapon used, and forensic examination results can establish guilt in criminal cases, even based on circumstantial evidence.
The conviction of an accused person under Section 27(3) of the Arms Act is not permissible in law if the accused is also charged with committing murder under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.
The court can enhance compensation based on the deceased's income and family dependency, and adjust the multiplier used by the Tribunal if found unjustified.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.