Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News
The High Court stated that the convict had taken innocent lives in an extremely barbaric, criminal, and heartless manner. His acts have shocked not only the judicial conscience but also the conscience of society.
“Respondent has used utter derogatory language for the Single Judge bench to the extent of saying that the Single Judge is a ‘thief’ and he has full proof of the same.”
Calcutta High Court held that the proximity between the last seen circumstance and the recovery of the victim’s body established a livelink between their presence and the rape and murder.
“It is just not enough for the court to say that the dying declaration is reliable, as the accused is named in the dying declaration as the assailant.”
The Madhya Pradesh High Court observed that the test which is to be applied for death sentence are – crime test, i.e., aggravating circumstances and mitigating circumstances, criminal test and R-R test.
“It is well-settled law that awarding of life sentence is a rule and death is an exception. The application of the rarest of rare case principle is dependent upon and differs from case to case.”
The Supreme Court also directed the competent authority to deal with the mercy petition later and take further decision as and when deemed necessary.
The Supreme Court stated that it was imperative to conduct evaluation of mitigating circumstances at the trial stage, in order ‘to avoid slipping into a retributive response to the brutality of the crime’.
Justice Chandrachud referred to the recent 2023 budget and stated that Government of India had announced a provision of 7000 crores for Phase III of E-Courts project which would enhance the accessibility of the judicial institutions and improve the efficiency of the justice delivery system in India. He also informed that the Supreme Court heard 3.37 lakhs cases through VC during the Covid period.
Supreme Court: In a suo motu case initiated to address the question as to whether the provision of pre-sentence hearing in capital
Madras High Court: In a case related to a reference made by the Additional District and Sessions Judge under S.
Patiala House Courts: Stating that the crimes for which the convict had been convicted were intended to strike at the heart of
Bombay High Court: Division Bench of V.K. Jadhav and Shrikant D. Kulkarni, JJ., addressed a case of ‘Honour Killing’ by a brother
Supreme Court: In a case where the trial court had convicted the accused and imposed death penalty on the very same day,
“There is a bounden duty cast on the Courts to elicit information of all the relevant factors and consider those regarding the possibility of reformation, even if the accused remains silent.”
by Aastik Dhingra†
by Abhishek Goyal†
Sucheta Sarkar, Editorial Assistant has put this story together
All four death row convicts in the Nirbhaya gang-rape and murder case, namely, Mukesh, Akshay, Vinay, and Pawan, were sent to the
Supreme Court: A bench head by R. Banumathi, J has reserved the order on the issue of rejection of mercy petition of