Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2026 Supreme(SC) 460

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Vikram Nath, Sandeep Mehta, Vijay Bishnoi, JJ.
Aman Singh & Anr. – Appellants
Versus
State of Bihar – Respondent
Criminal Appeal No(s). of 2026 (Arising out of SLP (Criminal) No(s). of 2026) (Diary No(s). 24574 of 2026)
Decided On : 27-04-2026

Advocates appeared:
For the Petitioner(s): Mr. Pramod Kumar Dubey, Sr. Adv. Mr. Saurav Agrawal, Adv. Mr. Ravi Sharma, AOR Ms. Madhulika Rai Sharma, Adv. Ms. Pinky Dubey, Adv. Mr. Satyam Sharma, Adv. Mr. Anjani Kumar Rai, Adv. Ms. Prachi Dubey, Adv. Mr. Arya Bhat, Adv. Ms. Anadi Mishra, Adv. Mr. Samrat Kasana, Adv. Ms. Shivangi Mishra, Adv. Ms. Suchitra Kumbhat, Adv. Mr. Abhilash Pathak, Adv. Mr. Mukesh Kumar Tiwari, Adv. Mr. Ajit Kumar Upadhyay, Adv. Mr. Satish Kumar Shukla, Adv. Ms. Amrita Vatsa, Adv.

IMPORTANT POINTS
(1) Death Sentence (Capital Punishment) – Mitigating and aggravating circumstances – Report pertaining to aggravating and mitigating circumstances shall, as a matter of course, be called for by trial Court itself once accused is convicted, prior to determination of sentence.
(2) Each High Court, under aegis of High Court Legal Services Committee, shall constitute and maintain a dedicated panel of Advocates for handling death reference matters.

Headnote:
Criminal Law – Death Sentence (Capital Punishment) – Mitigating and aggravating circumstances – In a significant number of cases involving potential death sentence, quality of defence afforded to accused remains inadequate, resulting in ineffective legal representation at crucial stages of proceedings – Such deficiencies are often reflected in lackadaisical investigation and slackness in trial proceedings – There is hardly any attempt to collect data relating to mitigating and aggravating circumstances, thereby depriving Courts of a complete and balanced perspective necessary for a just determination and imposition of sentence – Absence of competent and effective prosecution and defence not only undermines fairness of process but also increases risk of a disproportionate, unjust, and uninformed sentencing outcome – Directions issued: –
A. Report pertaining to aggravating and mitigating circumstances shall, as a matter of course, be called for by trial Court itself once accused is convicted, prior to determination of sentence.
B. In the event such a report has not been called for or placed on record before trial Court, High Court shall mandatorily call for same at stage of admission of death reference.
C. Concerned authorities shall ensure that such reports are comprehensive, duly verified, and furnished within a stipulated timeframe so as to avoid any delay in adjudicatory process, and to aid and enable Courts to undertake a meaningful, informed, and constitutionally compliant sentencing exercise. Upon receipt of such report, Court concerned shall afford adequate opportunity to parties to peruse the same and to advance oral submissions thereon. In cases where reports procured by trial Court are found to be ineffective or lacking in proper details, High Court would be at liberty to call for a fresh report.
D. In every death sentence confirmation reference brought before High Courts and this Court, Legal Services Committee concerned shall assign a dedicated legal team comprising one Senior Counsel and at least two advocates having a minimum of 7 years practice, to represent convicted person. Such representation shall be provided irrespective of whether convict has engaged Private Counsel, so as to ensure full and effective assistance to Court in matters involving death penalty, which necessitate a careful balancing of interests of justice, societal concerns, and possibility of reformation and rehabilitation. Appointed legal team shall be furnished with complete case records and afforded adequate time to prepare, conduct research, and present a comprehensive assessment of mitigating circumstances. Legal aid team so appointed shall work in cohesion with representing private counsel, if any.
E. Each High Court, under aegis of High Court Legal Services Committee, shall constitute and maintain a dedicated panel of Advocates for handling death reference matters.
F. National Legal Services Authority shall frame and circulate appropriate guidelines identifying relevant fields of enquiry for gathering mitigating circumstances and may engage trained teams, including legal and social science professionals, to undertake fieldwork involving interaction with the convict, their family, and relevant authorities, for the purpose of collecting detailed information regarding background, antecedents, socio-economic conditions, mental health status, and other relevant factors. Such information shall be made available to appointed legal team, which shall, in turn, place before Court a holistic and well-documented account of convict’s potential for reformation along with all pertinent mitigating and aggravating circumstances to assist in a just and informed determination of sentence. (Paras 11, 12 and 13)
Facts of the case:
Present proceedings arise from the judgment and order dated 22.01.2026 of High Court of Patna in Death Reference No.2/2024 and Criminal Appeal (DB) No.691 of 2024.
Findings of Court:
Registry shall forthwith communicate this order to all High Courts through their respective Registrar Generals; Member Secretary, National Legal Services Authority; and Member Secretaries of Legal Services Authorities of all States and Union Territories for necessary compliance.
Result : Matter listed for next hearing.

ORDER :

1. Heard.

2. Leave granted.

3. These proceedings arise from the judgment and order dated 22.01.2026 of the High Court of Patna in Death Reference No.2/2024 and Criminal Appeal (DB) No.691 of 2024.

4. The execution of the death sentence of the appellant(s) shall remain stayed pending the hearing and final disposal of the present appeal(s).

5. The original record of the case be summoned from the Trial Court and the High Court. A copy of the translated record shall be supplied to the counsel for the parties.

6. In view of the orders passed by this Court in matters involving capital punishment, we issue the following directions:

a. The respondent-State of Bihar shall place before this Court the report(s) of all the Probation Officers relating to the appellant(s) within a period of sixteen (16) weeks.

b. The Superintendent of Prison, Buxar Jail, Bihar, shall submit a report with regard to the nature of work which have been performed by the appellant(s) while in jail and a report with regard to the conduct and behaviour of the appellant(s) while in jail within a period of sixteen (16) weeks.

c. The Superintendent of Prison, Buxar Jail, Bihar, shall also get done the psychological evaluation of the appellant(s) from the Government Medical Hospital. The report of the evaluation shall be submitted to this Court through the Standing Counsel for the State of Bihar within a period of period of sixteen (16) weeks.

d. Ms. Devika Rawat, Associate (Mitigation) and Ms. Sana Vohra, Associated with the Square Circle Clinic, NALSAR University of Law, are permitted to have access to the appellant(s) –Aman Singh and Sonal Singh respectively, who are presently lodged in Buxar Jail, Bihar, to conduct multiple in-person interviews for the purpose of collecting information relevant to sentencing and to submit a Mitigation Investigation Report on behalf of the appellant(s) through the appellants’ Advocate-on-Record within twenty (20) weeks.

e. The Superintendent, Buxar Jail, Bihar, shall ensure that, for the sake of confidentiality, these interviews shall be conducted in a separate interviewing space without any prison official or police staff being within earshot distance, and audio recorders be permitted to be used to record the interviews.

f. The person(s) nominated by Ms. Devika Rawat and Ms. Sana Vohra are permitted to accompany them to translate during the interview.

g. Ms. Devika Rawat and Ms. Sana Vohra are granted permission to obtain documents pertaining to the appellant(s), including but not limited to medical records, jail conduct, certificates of any educational, vocational or employment opportunities undertaken, etc. that the appellant(s) may wish to submit for the purpose of sentencing information.

7. The Registry is directed to transmit a copy of this order to the Standing Counsel for the State of Bihar, who shall, in turn, ensure that the order is communicated to the relevant authorities for compliance. The Registry shall, in addition, send a due intimation to all the concerned authorities immediately for compliance.

8. All the reports shall be duly compiled and placed before this Court on the next date of hearing.

9. Learned counsel for the parties to assist the Registry in pagination of the record.

10. At this juncture, we are inclined to consider an issue which has repeatedly engaged the attention of this Court in cases involving the imposition of the death penalty. In Manoj and Ors. v. State of Madhya Pradesh, (2023) 2 SCC 353, this Court in the context of death reference cases, underscored that while reformation is a foundational goal of criminal punishment, repeatedly affirmed in its jurisprudence, the absence of a structured and measurable framework, coupled with the inadequate implementation of meaningful prison reforms, has significantly hampered the system’s ability to achieve genuine rehabilitation. In this backdrop, the Court proposed the formulation of practical guidelines to aid courts in systematically collecting and evaluating m

Click Here to Read the rest of this document