Supreme Court: Staying the execution of death sentence awarded to a couple for murdering 7 members of appellant’s family including an infant, the bench of Dr. A.K. Sikri and UU Lalit, J. held that a death warrant cannot be issued until all the remedies of a convict have been exhausted. When right to appeal by way of Article 136 of the Constitution has been exhausted, a convict still has a remedy left by way of filing a review petition under Article 137 of the Constitution also, his right to file mercy petition to the Governor and President under Articles 161 and 72 of the Constitution respectively also remains intact. Therefore, till the limitation period for filing review petition and thereafter, reasonable time for filing the mercy petition has not lapsed, issuing of death warrants would not be procedure established by law under Article 21 of the Constitution. It was held that procedural safeguards must not only be followed at the time of sentencing but also after sentencing in the form of judicial review and mercy petitions.
Further, it was held that in order to be in conformity with Article 21 of the Constitution, the procedure followed, from the confirmation of death sentence by the highest Court till the execution of the said sentence must treat the convict with human dignity to the extent which is reasonable and permissible in law. Thereby, execution of death sentence cannot be carried out in a arbitrary, hurried and secret manner without allowing the convicts to exhaust all legal remedies. The court also directed that the procedure laid down in PUDR’s case and the Shatrughan Sinha guidelines must be followed by the authorities at the time of execution of death sentence.
In the present case, the death sentence was pronounced upon them by the trial court which was subsequently upheld by the HC and the SC and within 6 days of disposal of appeal in the SC, death warrants were issued by the Sessions Judge without waiting for the exhaustion of remedies of the convicts. This act of the Sessions Judge was held to be done in a haste and hence, the same was quashed and set aside.Shabnam v. Union of India, 2015 SCC OnLine SC 527, decided on 27.05.2015
