Capital Punishment - The Legal Chamber

Motive vs. Reform : Supreme Court Commutes Death Penalty Despite ‘Beastly’ Murders

12Aug

By The Legal ChamberNo Comments

Supreme Court

Motive vs. Reform : Supreme Court Commutes Death Penalty Despite ‘Beastly’ Murders

The Supreme Court upheld the conviction of the appellant under Section 302 IPC for the brutal murder of five family members, affirming the concurrent findings of the lower courts. While acknowledging the crime's heinous nature, the Court commuted the death sentence to life imprisonment without remission, citing mitigating factors such as the appellant's potential for reformation, lack of criminal antecedents, and satisfactory prison conduct. The judgment emphasized adherence to the "rarest of rare" doctrine and the necessity of comprehensive sentencing considerations, including psychological and social background reports, as outlined in Bachan Singh and Manoj v. State of M.P.. The Court balanced the gravity of the offense with the principle of reformative justice. Facts Of The Case: The ...

DNA Evidence & Last Seen Theory : Supreme Court Commutes Death Penalty to Life in Child Rape-Murder Case

The Supreme Court upheld the conviction of the accused under Sections 376, 377, 302 IPC and Section 5/6 POCSO Act for the sexual assault and murder of a minor. However, it commuted the death penalty to life imprisonment, ruling that the case did not meet the "rarest of rare" standard due to insufficient consideration of mitigating circumstances and rehabilitation potential. The Court emphasized the necessity of balancing aggravating and mitigating factors before imposing capital punishment, following precedents like Mohd. Farooq Abdul Gafur and Gudda v. State of M.P., while affirming the reliability of DNA evidence and the last-seen theory in securing conviction. Facts Of The Case: The case involved the brutal sexual assault and murder of a 10-year-old girl in Dehradun, Uttarakhand. On 2...

Supreme Court How Contradictory Witness Testimonies Saved a Man from the Death Penalty

The Supreme Court acquitted the appellant, overturning his death sentence, due to glaring inconsistencies in eyewitness testimonies (PW1, PW2) and lack of corroborative evidence. The prosecution failed to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt, as recoveries were unreliable, forensic links were absent, and material contradictions undermined the case. The Court emphasized strict adherence to evidentiary standards in capital offenses. Facts Of The Case: The case involves the brutal murder of four family members—Seema Rani (the appellant’s wife), Reena Rani (sister-in-law), and two minor children, Sumani Kumari (3-4 years) and Harsh (1.5-2 years)—along with injuries to two others, Harry (5 years) and Om Prakash (18 years). The incident occurred on November 29, 2013, in the early morning at the...