Section 32 Arbitration Act | Termination for Non-Payment of Fees Ends Arbitrator’s Mandate; Remedy Lies in Section 14(2): Supreme Court False Allegations of Dowry and Bigamy Amount to Mental Cruelty: Madras High Court Upholds Divorce Plaintiff Must Prove Her Own Title Before Seeking Demolition Of Defendant’s Pre-existing House: Andhra Pradesh High Court Mismatch Between Bullet and Recovered Gun Fatal to Prosecution: Calcutta High Court Acquits Man Convicted for Murder Where the Conduct of the Sole Eye-Witness Appears Unnatural and No Independent Witness Is Examined, Conviction Cannot Stand: Allahabad High Court Fraudulent Sale of Vehicle During Hire Purchase Renders Agreement Void: Gauhati High Court Upholds Decree for Refund of ₹4.90 Lakhs Unsigned Written Statement Can’t Silence a Defendant: Hyper-Technical Objections Must Yield to Substantive Justice: Delhi High Court Default Bail | No Accused, No Extension: Delhi High Court Rules Custody Extension Without Notice as Gross Illegality Under Article 21 Gratuity Can Be Withheld Post-Retirement for Proven Negligence Under Service Rules – Payment of Gratuity Act Does Not Override CDA Rules: Calcutta High Court Cognizance Is of the Offence, Not the Offender: Madras High Court Rejects Challenge to ED’s Supplementary Complaint in PMLA Case Acquittal in Rajasthan No Bar to Trial in Madhya Pradesh: MP High Court Rejects Double Jeopardy Plea in Antiquities Theft Case 20% Deposit Isn’t Automatic in Cheque Bounce Appeals: Right to Appeal Can’t Be Priced Out: Punjab & Haryana High Court Checks Mechanical Use of Section 148 NI Act A Child Is Not a Non-Earner: Punjab & Haryana High Court Sets New Benchmark in Compensation for Minors’ Deaths 90 Days Is Not Sacrosanct – Courts Can Permit Reply to Counter-Claim Even Beyond Prescribed Time in Interest of Justice: Punjab & Haryana High Court Magistrate Can Proceed Only for Offences Committed in India Until Sanction Is Obtained for Acts Outside India: Orissa High Court on International Financial Fraud Award Is Vitiated by Non-Consideration of Material Evidence: Orissa High Court Sets Aside Industrial Tribunal’s Wage Award in IMFA Case POCSO | Absence of Child's Name in Birth Certificate Not Fatal: Kerala High Court No One Has the Right to Impute Illicit Motives to Judges in the Name of Free Speech: Karnataka High Court Jails Man for Criminal Contempt DV Complaint Cannot Be Quashed at Threshold Under Article 227: Madras High Court Refuses to Interfere, Directs Accused to Seek Remedy Before Magistrate Recovery Wasn't From Accused's Exclusive Knowledge — Cylinder Already Marked in Site Plan Before Arrest: Allahabad High Court Acquits Man in Murder Case State Can’t Block SARFAESI Sale by Late Revenue Entries: Secured Creditor’s Charge Prevails Over Tax Dues: Punjab & Haryana High Court Slams Sub-Registrar’s Refusal Providing SIM Card Without Knowledge of Its Criminal Use Does Not Imply Criminal Conspiracy: P&H High Court Grants Bail in UAPA & Murder Case Importer Who Accepts Enhanced Valuation Cannot Later Contest Confiscation and Penalty for Undervaluation: Madras High Court Upholds Strict Liability under Customs Act "Allegations Are Not Proof: Madras High Court Refuses Divorce Without Substantiated Cruelty or Desertion" When FIR Is Filed After Consulting Political Leaders, the Possibility of Coloured Version Cannot Be Ruled Out: Kerala High Court Mere Allegations of Antecedents Without Conviction Can't Defeat Right to Anticipatory Bail: Kerala High Court Section 106 Of Evidence Act Cannot Be Invoked In Vacuum – Prosecution Must First Lay Foundational Facts: Karnataka High Court Acquits Wife And Co-Accused In Husband’s Murder Case Parity Cannot Be Claimed When Roles Are Different: Karnataka High Court Refuses Bail to Youth Accused of Brutal Killing Injured Wife Would Not Falsely Implicate Her Husband: Gauhati High Court Upholds Conviction in Domestic Stabbing Case Disputed Bids, Missing Evidence and No Prejudice: Delhi High Court Refuses to Intervene in Tender Challenge under Article 226 Setting Fire to House Where Only Minors Were Present is a Heinous Offence – No Quashing Merely Because Parties Settled: Calcutta High Court No Exclusive Possession Means Licence, Not Lease: Calcutta High Court Rules City Civil Court Has Jurisdiction to Evict Licensees Defendant's Own Family Attested the Sale Agreement – Yet She Called It Nominal: Andhra Pradesh High Court Upholds Specific Performance Renewal Not Automatic, No Evidence Of Notice Or Mutual Agreement: AP High Court Dismisses Indian Oil’s Appeal Against Eviction

Supreme Court Declines Commutation of Death Sentence Due to Pending Appeals and Security Concerns

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant judgment delivered on May 3, 2023, the Supreme Court of India declined to commute the death sentence of Balwant Singh into life imprisonment due to the pendency of appeals filed by co-accused and security concerns. The case, Writ Petition (Crl.) No. 261 of 2020, raised the issue of inordinate delay in deciding the mercy petition filed by Singh.

Background:

Balwant Singh was convicted for his involvement in a bomb blast that resulted in the death of the then Chief Minister of Punjab, along with several others. The trial court awarded Singh the death penalty, which was later confirmed by the High Court. However, while the death sentence of his co-accused was commuted to life imprisonment, Singh did not file any appeal after the High Court's judgment.

The Mercy Petition:

Singh claimed that a mercy petition was filed on his behalf in 2012. However, the Union of India disputed receiving any such petition. The Ministry of Home Affairs had issued a letter in September 2019, proposing the commutation of Singh's death sentence to life imprisonment under Article 72 of the Indian Constitution. The letter, sent to the Chief Secretaries of several states, including Punjab, listed Singh as one of the prisoners whose case was to be considered for commutation.

Delay in Decision and Pending Appeals:

Singh's counsel argued that the delay of over 10 years in deciding the mercy petition warranted the commutation of his sentence. However, the Additional Solicitor General representing the Union of India contended that Singh had not expressed remorse and had used contemptuous language before the High Court, justifying the refusal of mercy. Moreover, as the appeals filed by the co-accused were still pending before the Supreme Court, their outcome could potentially impact Singh's case.

Court's Decision:

The Supreme Court, in its judgment, noted that Singh had not personally filed any mercy petition and that the alleged petition was filed by the Shiromani Gurudwara Prabandhak Committee (SGPC) on his behalf. The court further observed that the Ministry of Home Affairs had decided to defer the consideration of Singh's mercy petition due to the pending appeals and concerns about national security and law and order.

In its order, the court declined to issue further directions, stating that it was within the domain of the executive to make decisions on sensitive issues. The competent authority was directed to reconsider the mercy petition at a later stage, when deemed necessary.

D.D-3.May.2023

BALWANT SINGH  vs UNION OF INDIA & ORS.   

[gview file="https://lawyer-e-news.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/05/03-May-2023-Balwant-Vs-UOI.pdf"]

Latest Legal News