LAWS(SC)-2023-3-74

SUNDAR @ SUNDARRAJAN Vs. STATE BY INSPECTOR OF POLICE

Decided On March 21, 2023
SUNDAR @ SUNDARRAJAN Appellant
V/S
STATE BY INSPECTOR OF POLICE Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This judgment consists of the following Sec. :

(2.) In Mohd. Arif, this Court took note of the irreversible nature of the death penalty and of the possibility of two judicial minds reaching differing conclusions on the question of a case being appropriate for the award of the death penalty. The judgment of the majority allowed the right to oral hearing in review for cases involving death penalty:

(3.) A recent study by Project 39A examined all the judgments involving a sentence of death delivered by the Supreme Court between 2007 and 2021 as part of which it analysed the exercise of the review jurisdiction in capital cases.[Exercise of Review Jurisdiction in Capital Cases in DEATH PENALTY AND THE INDIAN SUPREME COURT (2007-2021), Project 39A, National Law University Delhi (2022).] It noted that, during the period covered by the study, before the decision in Mohd. Arif, 14 review petitions were dismissed by circulation and the capital punishment was confirmed in all of them. Out of these, 13 were reopened in view of the judgment which resulted in only 4 re-confirmations of the death penalty. On the other hand, 7 judgments resulted in commutation of death sentences, 1 in acquittal and 1 case being abated due to the death of the prisoner. In view of the above data, the impact of the oral hearing of review petitions, due to the judgment in Mohd. Arif leading to a change in the outcome of a death penalty confirmation is evident.