New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Thursday dismissed the review petition filed by Lashkar-e-Taiba terrorist Mohammad Arif alias Ashfaq, confirming his death sentence in the 2000 Red Fort attack case. But the writ petition filed by Arif, which led to the reopening of his petition, has saved nearly 20 people from hanging since 2014.
was due to Arif’s petition Historic decision of Supreme Court In 2014, it directed an oral hearing in open court in review petitions related to death penalty cases. This resulted in the retrial of several review petitions and the commutation of several death sentences and the acquittal of six prisoners in one case.
Prior to 2014, review petitions filed against judgments confirming the death penalty were heard ‘by operation’, which is in the judges’ chambers. The decision came under discussion, there was no opportunity to represent the voice of the petitioner.
Directing petitions to be heard in open court allows a lawyer to plead on behalf of a prisoner.
In the judgment, the top court emphasized the importance of this oral hearing in review petitions of death penalty, considering the fact that “the death penalty is irrevocable in nature” and “once the death sentence is executed, whose Life ends as a result of “criminal”.
The verdict was passed on a bunch of writ petitions filed in the Supreme Court, including those of Arif and Yakub Memon. hanged in 2015 for his role in the 1993 Mumbai blasts. The first petition in this batch was filed in 2010 by C. Muniappan, an accused in the 2000 Dharmapuri bus burning case in Tamil Nadu. Senior advocate KK Venugopal argued this petition. All these petitions were taken together, with Arif’s being the first case, despite Muniappan’s petition being filed in February 2014, four years after.
The court had ruled that its decision would apply to pending review petitions and future review petitions. Notably, the court had also said that the judgment would also apply to review petitions which have already been dismissed but where the death sentence has not been executed at the time of the verdict. It said that in such cases the petitioners can apply for reopening of their review petition within a month.
according to a report published By Project 39A, a legal research and advocacy initiative of the National Law University, Delhi, 13 cases were reopened and re-heard after the 2014 verdict. Seven of these decisions resulted in the reduction of the death sentence of nine prisoners and a decision Six prisoners were acquitted.
Another case was ended due to the death of the prisoner and in four judgments the court upheld the death penalty for five prisoners.
Of the cases decided after the 2014 verdict, seven rulings upheld the death sentence awarded to nine prisoners, and three rulings reduced the death sentence awarded to four prisoners.
Read also: ‘Legal aid should be effective, not just in name’: Why Supreme Court acquits death row convicts
From Chamber to Open Court
Prior to 2014, review petitions filed against decisions confirming the death penalty were heard ‘by circulation’ without any oral hearing in open court.
Six writ petitions with Arif’s key case were then filed before the SC with two demands – cases involving death penalty to be heard by a bench of at least three Supreme Court judges, and death penalty. Review petitions should be heard in open court.
In September 2014, a five-judge bench ruled by a 4:1 majority that only a three-judge Supreme Court bench would hear appeals in death penalty cases. While Justice Jasti Chelameswar disagreed, the majority judgment said, “When it comes to cases of death penalty, we feel that the power of the spoken word should be given another chance, regardless of the ultimate success rate.” be the minimum.”
The court acknowledged that oral hearing in such review petitions is important considering the fact that “on the same set of facts, a judicial mind may come to the conclusion that the circumstances do not warrant the death penalty, while the other calls it a fit case wholly justifies the death penalty”.
Out of the 13 cases which were heard again after this decision, One Which acquitted six prisoners, the Supreme Court decided to pay a compensation of Rs 5 lakh each to those acquitted, observing that they were “nomadic tribesmen and falsely implicated”. The 2003 case involved the murder of five members of a family and the gang-rape of two women during a robbery.
Read also: Juvenile at the time of arrest, why 2017 Gurugram school massacre accused will be tried as an adult
‘A direct attack on India’s unity, sovereignty’
Arif was sentenced to death by the trial court in October 2005, which was confirmed by the Delhi High Court in September 2007 and the Supreme Court in August 2011. August 2012, and a curative petition filed by him was also dismissed in January 2014.
He then filed a writ petition in the Supreme Court, which resulted in the verdict in September 2014. His review petition was as follows reopened and tell me.
However, Chief Justice of India UU Lalit, S. A bench of Ravindra Bhat and Bela M. Trivedi on Thursday dismissed Arif’s review petition and confirmed the death sentence awarded to him.
The apex court now felt that “the circumstances on record clearly state and beyond any doubt the review proves the involvement of the petitioner in the offense”.
It said, “The grave circumstances to be evident from the record, and in particular the fact that there was a direct assault on the unity, integrity and sovereignty of India, are wholly outweighed by the factors which, even remotely, undermine the circumstances on record.” as may be taken into account.”
(Edited by Therese Sudeep)
Read also: ‘Mother of the Assassin’ – Not only prisoners in India, their families also go on death row