The bench has expressed dissatisfaction and concern over the death sentence not being executed for years even after the Supreme Court’s verdict. In the Supreme Court, a bench of Justice Abhay S Oak, Justice Ahmaduddin Amanullah and Justice Augustine George Masih reserved its decision after completing the hearing on a similar case.
The bench expressed concern that indefinite delay in execution of death sentence under the guise of legal process can have a bad impact on the death row convict and the entire justice system. This is often happening in the absence of guidelines for timely disposal of mercy petitions.
The court said an important thing
During the hearing, the three-judge bench said that such delays are often considered to be like a sword hanging over someone’s head. Because until your death sentence is not executed, this sword will remain hanging over your head. There is a fear in the mind that this hanging sword can fall on your head at any time.
While hearing the case of Maharashtra Government vs Pradeep Yashwant Kokde, the bench said that often such delays also occur due to lack of clarity on what procedure should be followed by the Sessions Court in cases where the death sentence has been confirmed by the High Court but the convict has filed a mercy petition.
Also read: Delhi CM Arvind Kejriwal in jail, hearing on plea for remission of sentence in Supreme Court deferred
The court asked that suppose the sessions court issues a warrant for execution of the death sentence immediately after receiving the writ from the Supreme Court because every petition of the convict is rejected, then by then the mercy petition is filed with the Governor or the President. That is, they issue the warrant despite the mercy petition being pending. What is the procedure for the sessions court when the mercy petition is pending? This needs to be clarified.
The court was hearing the case of Maharashtra
To address this gap, the Supreme Court has suggested framing of guidelines to give full effect to Sections 413 and 414 of the Code of Criminal Procedure/CrPC (and corresponding provisions under Sections 453 and 454 of the Indian Civil Defence Code/BNSS) in the matter of execution of death sentence orders by the Court of Session.
This bench of the Supreme Court was hearing a criminal appeal filed by the Maharashtra government in 2019. The state had challenged the Bombay High Court’s decision to commute the death sentence awarded to two men, Purushottam Borate and Pradeep Kokade, convicted for the rape and murder of a Pune BPO employee in 2007.
The High Court reduced the sentence on the view that there was a lot of delay in the execution of the death sentence. This delay also includes the time taken to decide on the mercy petitions sent by the convicts to the Governor, which was about 1-2 years. After this, the High Court converted the death sentence given to two convicts to life imprisonment. In this, each will have to spend at least 35 years in jail.
On this appeal, the Supreme Court asked the state why it was insisting that the convicts be hanged despite such a long delay. During the hearing, it was argued that the delay in execution of the death sentence in this case was not only due to administrative reasons but also due to judicial and procedural reasons. Because it was told that even after the mercy petition was rejected by the Governor, the convicts sentenced to death remained in uncertainty for years as to when they would be given the death penalty.
Also read: Supreme Court’s big decision on the promotion of two High Court judges, directs the collegium to reconsider
Emphasis on setting process
The convicts’ counsel argued that the delay was unconstitutional and violated their rights under Article 21 (life and personal liberty) of the Constitution. The court found that the execution of the death sentence could be further delayed due to the sessions court not being actively informed about the rejection of the mercy petition. The bench said that all these delays violate the rights of not only the convicts but also the victims. This case has exposed the flaws in the system and process.
This forced the court to consider whether some guidelines should be made to ensure that death sentences are not indefinitely delayed. As Justice Oka said, ‘Probably now we will have to decide the procedure. It will be about when, how and what the public prosecutor has to do when the mercy petition of a convict against the death sentence is rejected. It cannot happen like it has been. There should be a procedure for how the prosecutor and the court have to react.’
The bench said that after the Governor rejects the mercy petition, the state should move proactively in approaching the sessions court for execution of the death sentence.
Source (PTI) (NDTV) (HINDUSTANTIMES)