38.6c New Delhi, India, Tuesday, January 13, 2026
Top Stories Supreme Court
Political NEWS Legislative Corner Celebstreet International Videos
Subscribe Contact Us
close
Judiciary

SLP Against Death Sentence Should Not Be Dismissed Without Giving Reasons: SC [Read Judgment]

By LawStreet News Network      06 August, 2019 05:08 PM      0 Comments
SLP Against Death Sentence Should Not Be Dismissed Without Giving Reasons: SC [Read Judgment]

The Supreme Court in a recent case of Babasaheb Maruti Kamble v. State of Maharashtra has held that special leave petition filed in those cases where death sentence is awarded by the courts below, should not be dismissed without giving reasons, at least qua death sentence.

A three-judge Bench comprising of Justices A.K. Sikri, Ashok Bhushan and Indira Banerjee was hearing a review petition filed by the petitioner who was convicted for offences under Sections 302, 376(2)(f) and 342 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.

The petitioner was awarded death penalty for the offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, by the trial court for which a Reference to the High Court was made for the confirmation of the death sentence. The petitioner also challenged his conviction and sentences imposed by filing a Criminal Appeal before the High Court. The High Court upheld the conviction under the aforesaid provisions and also confirmed death sentence of the petitioner. Against that judgment, the petitioner preferred Special Leave Petition (Criminal) No. 458 of 2015. The special leave petition came up for preliminary hearing on January 06, 2015, which was dismissed by passing the following order: "Delay condoned. Dismissed."

Thus, the present review petition was filed seeking review of the aforesaid order of dismissal in limine.

Senior Advocate Shekhar Naphade, appearing for the petitioner, submitted before the court that in a case where conviction is followed by death sentence, and the special leave petition is filed thereagainst, such petition should not be dismissed in limine and in case the Supreme Court still finds it fit to do so, some reasons need to be recorded.

The senior counsel relied on Mohammed Ajmal Mohammad Amir Kasab alias Abu Mujahid v. State of Maharashtra to contend that, in those cases where death sentence is imposed, the court should summon the record when it is making the final order even at the stage of special leave petition.

Taking into consideration the submissions made by the senior counsel, the court said that there may be cases where at the special leave petition stage itself, the Court may find that insofar as conviction is concerned there is no scope for interference at all as such a conviction for offence under Section 302 is recorded on the basis of evidence which is impeccable, trustworthy, credible and proves the guilt of the accused beyond any shadow of doubt. At the same time, if death penalty is to be affirmed even while dismissing the special leave petition in limine, it should be by a reasoned order on the aspect of sentence, at least.

Further, the court also said that proper exercise of sentence discretion calls for consideration of various factors like the nature of offence, circumstancesboth extenuating or aggravating, the prior criminal record, if any, of the offender, the age of the offender, his background, his education, his personal life, his social adjustment, the emotional and mental condition of the offender, the prospects for the rehabilitation of the offender, the possibility of his rehabilitation in the life of community, the possibility of treatment or training of the offender, the possibility that the sentence may serve as a deterrent to crime by the offender or by others.

Thus, the court allowing the review petition recalled the order dated January 6, 2015, and restored the special leave petition to its original number.



Share this article:

User Avatar
About:


Leave a feedback about this
TRENDING NEWS

ai-judges-the-future-of-algorithmic-decision-making-in-courts
Trending Vantage Points
“AI Judges” The Future of Algorithmic Decision-Making in Courts

Can algorithms deliver justice? This article explores AI judges, constitutional challenges, ethical risks, global models, and India’s cautious path forward.

12 January, 2026 07:07 PM

TOP STORIES

borrowers-cannot-invoke-writ-jurisdiction-to-compel-banks-to-extend-one-time-settlement-benefits-kerala-hc
Trending Judiciary
Borrowers Cannot Invoke Writ Jurisdiction to Compel Banks to Extend One-Time Settlement Benefits: Kerala HC [Read Judgment]

Kerala High Court holds borrowers cannot invoke writ jurisdiction to compel banks to grant One-Time Settlement benefits, as OTS is not a legal right.

07 January, 2026 09:22 PM
leela-palace-udaipur-ordered-to-pay-10-lakh-after-housekeeping-staff-enters-occupied-room-without-consent
Trending Business
Leela Palace Udaipur Ordered to Pay ₹10 Lakh After Housekeeping Staff Enters Occupied Room Without Consent [Read Order]

Chennai Consumer Commission orders Leela Palace Udaipur to pay ₹10 lakh and refund room tariff for breach of guest privacy by housekeeping staff.

07 January, 2026 09:43 PM
sc-strikes-down-bihars-midway-change-in-recruitment-rules-for-assistant-engineers
Trending Judiciary
SC Strikes Down Bihar’s Midway Change in Recruitment Rules for Assistant Engineers [Read Judgment]

Supreme Court rules recruitment criteria cannot be changed midway, strikes down Bihar’s retrospective amendment granting weightage to contractual engineers.

07 January, 2026 10:03 PM
only-light-and-not-any-fight-madras-hc-upholds-single-judges-order-allowing-lighting-of-lamps-on-deepathoon
Trending Judiciary
Only Light And Not Any Fight: Madras HC Upholds Single Judge’s Order Allowing Lighting Of Lamps On Deepathoon [Read Judgment]

Madras High Court upholds order allowing lighting of Karthigai Deepam at Deepathoon, rejecting public order objections and dismissing 20 appeals.

07 January, 2026 10:57 PM

ADVERTISEMENT


Join Group

Signup for Our Newsletter

Get Exclusive access to members only content by email