advocatemmmohan
death sentence
Death commuted to Life Imprisonment – Murder of wife and children – Trial court imposed death penalty – High court confirmed the same – Apex court held that In the present case taking into the facts and circumstances of the case in hand and reasons stated above, we hold that the imposition of death sentence to the accused Amar Singh Yadav was not warranted. Accordingly we commute the sentence to life imprisonment. Further, we hold that the accused Amar Singh Yadav must serve a minimum of 30 years in jail without remissions before consideration of his case for premature release.= AMAR SINGH YADAV … APPELLANTS VERSUS STATE OF U.P. … RESPONDENTS = 2014 – July. Part -http://judis.nic.in/supremecourt/filename=41713
Death commuted to Life Imprisonment – Murder of wife and children – Trial court imposed death penalty – High court confirmed the same – Apex court held that In the present case taking into the facts and circumstances of the case in hand and reasons stated above, we hold that the imposition of death sentence to the accused … Continue reading
Commuted Death sentence to life – Apex court held that the death sentence awarded by the courts below require to be converted into life imprisonment but taking note of the diabolic manner in which the offence had been committed against a child, it is desirable that the appellant should serve minimum sentence of 30 years in jail without remission, though subject to exercise of constitutional power for clemency.= Selvam …Appellant Versus State Thr. Insp. of Police …Respondent = 2014 ( May.Part) http://judis.nic.in/supremecourt/filename=41499
Commuted Death sentence to life – Apex court held that the death sentence awarded by the courts below require to be converted into life imprisonment but taking note of the diabolic manner in which the offence had been committed against a child, it is desirable that the appellant should serve minimum sentence of 30 years in jail without remission, … Continue reading
Death sentence converted in to 30 years without remission = not a fit case where the death sentence awarded to the appellants should be affirmed.= ends of justice would meet if they are awarded the sentence of 30 years without remission. The facts and circumstances involved in the instant case do not meet the requirement of rarest of rare cases as explained hereinabove and we are of the considered view that it is not a fit case where the death sentence awarded to the appellants should be affirmed. Considering the current trend in view of the judgment of this Court in Swamy Shraddanand (2) @ Murali Manohar Mishra v. State of Karnataka, (2008) 13 SCC 767 which has subsequently been followed by this Court as is evident from the judgments in State of Uttar Pradesh v. Sanjay Kumar, (2012) 8 SCC 537; and Gurvail Singh @ Gala v. State of Punjab, (2013) 2 SCC 713, we are of the considered opinion that ends of justice would meet if they are awarded the sentence of 30 years without remission. = Madhu @ Madhuranatha & Anr. …Appellants Versus State of Karnataka …Respondent = published in http://judis.nic.in/supremecourt/imgst.aspx?filename=41020
Death sentence converted in to 30 years without remission = not a fit case where the death sentence awarded to the appellants should be affirmed.= ends of justice would meet if they are awarded the sentence of 30 years without remission. … Continue reading
