SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2015 Supreme(SC) 668

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
A.K. SIKRI, UDAY UMESH LALIT, JJ.
SHABNAM – PETITIONERS
VERSUS
UNION OF INDIA & ORS. – RESPONDENTS
WRIT PETITION (CRIMINAL) NO. 88 OF 2015 WITH WRIT PETITION (CRIMINAL) NO. 89 OF 2015
Decided On : 27-05-2015

IMPORTANT POINTS
Till the limitation period for filing the review petition and thereafter reasonable time for filing the mercy petition has not lapsed, issuing of death warrants would be violative of Article 21.
Execution of death sentence cannot be carried out in a arbitrary, hurried and secret manner without allowing the convicts to exhaust all legal remedies.

Headnote:(a) Constitution of India – Article 21, 137 – Supreme Court confirming death sentence on 15.05.2015 – Sessions Judge issuing death warrants on 21.05.2015 – Convicts yet to exhaust legal remedies available to them, like Review petition under Article 137 within 30 days, mercy petitions under Articles 72 and 161 – Till the limitation period for filing the review petition and thereafter reasonable time for filing the mercy petition has not lapsed, issuing of death warrants would be violative of Article 21 – Article 21 also guarantees human dignity which continues even after final verdict of Supreme Court till the convict meets his/her end – Held, condemned prisoners also have a right to dignity – Execution of death sentence cannot be carried out in a arbitrary, hurried and secret manner without allowing the convicts to exhaust all legal remedies – Procedure prescribed by the High Court of Allahabad in PUDR's case approved being in consonance with Article 21 – Following these procedures made mandatory while executing the death sentence – Guidelines contained in Shatrughan Chauhan's case also to be kept in mind. (Para 13, 21)

       (2014) 3 SCC 1; (2014) 9 SCC 737; (2014) 4 SCC 242; (1978) 1 SCC 248; (2014) 5 SCC 438 – Relied upon

       PIL No. 57810 of 2014 (All.) – Cited with approval

       (b) Constitution of India – Article 21 – Right to human dignity – Dignity of being human – Is infringed if a person is subjected to torture, humiliation, forced labour, etc. – Includes rights of accused to receive fair as well as speedy trial, legal aid – Measures to reform the convict in jail is also a facet of human dignity – Selection of mode of execution is another facet of human dignity in India – To uphold human dignity, Supreme Court held solitary confinement illegal and violative of Article 21. (Para 15, 17, 19)

       (1983) 4 SCC 645; (1978) 4 SCC 494 – Relied upon

       408 US 238 (1972); 428 US 153 (1976); (1980) 2 SCC 684 – Referred

       Facts of the case:

       Both Shabnam and Salim were convicted for murder of seven persons of Shabnam’s family and awarded death sentence which was affirmed up to the Supreme Court.

       The Sessions Judge, within six days of dismissal of appeal by the Supreme Court, issued death warrants for the convicts.

       The present writ petitions are filed on the ground that the death warrants are impermissible inasmuch as various remedies which are available to the convicts, even after the dismissal of the appeals by this Court, are still open and yet to be exercised by them. It is submitted that these convicts can file review petition seeking review of the judgment dated 15.05.2015. They also have the right to file mercy petitions to the Governor of Uttar Pradesh and to the President of India. In these circumstances, the execution of the death warrants within six days of the dismissal of the Criminal Appeals is challenged as illegal and contrary to the provisions of Article 21 of the Constitution of India.

       Finding of the Court:

       Death warrants signed by the Sessions Judge in haste without waiting for the exhaustion of the aforesaid remedies on the part of the convicts, are hereby quashed and set aside.

       Result: Writ petitions allowed. Rule made absolute.

ORDER

A.K. SIKRI, J.

Rule.

2) Ms. Pinky Anand, learned ASG, accepts notice on behalf of Union of India and Ms. Pragati Neekhra, learned counsel, accepts notice on behalf of State of Uttar Pradesh.

3) With the consent of the learned counsel appearing for the parties, we have taken up these petitions for final hearing and propose to dispose of these writ petitions by this order.

4) Writ Petition (Criminal) No. 88 of 2015 is filed by Shabnam and Writ Petition (Criminal) 89 of 2015 is filed by National Law University, Delhi, espousing the cause of Salim. Both Shabnam and Salim (hereinafter referred to as, “the convicts”) were co-accused in a murder case, that was tried against them on the allegations that they had committed murders of seven persons who were the members of Shabnam's family during the intervening night of 14th and 15th April, 2008. They were tried together and after the trial, the learned Sessions Court returned with the finding holding them guilty of the said murders, for which they were charged and pronounced death sentence on both these convicts vide Judgment and Sentence dated 15.07.2010, subject to confirmation by the High Court.

5) The High Court of Allahabad confirmed the death sentence of both the convicts vide Judgment and order dated 26.04.2013. The Judgment of the High Court was challenged in this Court and on 15.05.2015, the appeals of the convicts were dismissed by this Court as well, thereby confirming the conviction as well as sentence of death imposed on them.

6) The present writ petitions are filed on the allegations that on 21.05.2015, death warrants have been issued by the learned Sessions Judge, which are impermissible inasmuch as various remedies which are available to the convicts, even after the dismissal of the appeals by this Court, are still open and yet to be exercised by them. It is submitted that these convicts can file review petition seeking review of the judgment dated 15.05.2015. They also have the right to file mercy petitions to the Governor of Uttar Pradesh and to the President of India. In these circumstances, the execution of the death warrants within six days of the dismissal of the Criminal Appeals is challenged as illegal and contrary to the provisions of Article 21 of the Constitution of India.

7) Notice of these petitions was issued to the Union of India as well as to the State of Uttar Pradesh on 25.05.2015. Ms. Pinky Anand, learned ASG, has appeared on behalf of the Union of India and Ms. Pragati Neekhra, learned counsel, has appeared on behalf of the State of Uttar Pradesh.

8) Ms. Pinky Anand, learned ASG, has brought to our notice the instructions issued by the Ministry of Home Affairs, Government of India, which delineates the procedure regarding petitions for mercy in death sentence cases. She has referred to the following portion from the said instructions which impose certain duties on the Superintendent of Jail in connection with petitions for mercy from or on behalf of the convicts in sentence of death, paragraph

(II) thereof reads as under:

“On receipt of the intimation of the dismissal by the Supreme Court of the appeal or the application for special leave to appeal to it lodged by or on behalf of the convict, in case the convict concerned has made no previous petition for mercy, the Jail Superintendent shall forthwith inform him (the convict) that if he desires to submit a petition for mercy it should be submitted in writing within seven days of the date of such intimation.”

9) She fairly stated that the death warrants would not be executed immediately and the procedure laid down as per the aforesaid instructions of the Ministry of Home Affairs shall be followed. The learned counsel for the State of Uttar Pradesh also informed this Court that after the death warrants dated 21.05.2015 issued by the learned Sessions Judge were received by the Superintendent of Jail, the Superintendent of Jail sent these death warrants back to the learned Sessions Judge pointing o




































Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top