State Must Not Defeat Purpose Of Death Sentence By Showing Laxity In Implementation: Supreme Court

The Supreme Court while upholding the commutation of death sentences of two convicts highlighted several instances of administrative and judicial delays in the processing of mercy petitions and issuance of death warrants, which ultimately led to the commutation of sentence.The Court upheld the 2019 Bombay High Court judgment that commuted the death sentences of two convicts, Purshottam Borate and Pradeep Kokade, to life imprisonment with a fixed term of 35 years for gang rape and murder of a 22-year-old Pune BPO employee in 2007.A bench of Justices Abhay Oka, Ahsanuddin Amanullah, and Augustine George Masih observed a delay of over three years by state and centre in the processing of mercy petitions and by sessions court in the issuance of execution warrants. The Court also emphasized that the victims' right to justice is affected by such systemic delays.“We must also consider the rights of the victims of the offences to justice. Their right is to ensure that there is a prompt and proper investigation. However, we hasten to add that there is no right vested in the victim to insist on imposing capital punishment. The law must be enforced with all the vigour, and the Executive Branch of the State Government cannot show laxity in implementing the orders of conviction passed by the competent Courts. The very purpose of passing orders of sentence cannot be allowed to be defeated”, the Court held.The Court said that the delay in this case was not attributable to constitutional functionaries such as the Governor and President, rather it was caused by the inaction of the administration.“The time consumed from the filing of mercy petitions before the Hon'ble Governor to the date of issue of the execution of warrants by the learned Sessions Court, Pune, is of three years, eleven months and fourteen days. Even if we exclude the time actually taken by the constitutional functionaries to decide mercy petitions, still the delay will be of more than three years”, the Court added.The Court emphasized that such delays were avoidable and violated the convicts' rights under Article 21 of the Constitution.“The Executive must promptly deal with the mercy petitions filed by the convicts of the death sentence. In this case, the approach of the Executive, and especially the State Government, has been casual and negligent. Even the Sessions Court ought to have been pro-active. When the delay from the date of filing of mercy petitions till the date of issue of a warrant of execution is inordinate and unexplained, the right of the convicts guaranteed by Article 21 of the Constitution of India is violated. This right must be upheld, and it is the duty of the Constitutional Courts to do so”, the Court held.Observations on DelayThe convicts were sentenced to death by the Sessions Court In 2012. The death sentence was confirmed by the High Court and later upheld by the Supreme Court by the year 2015. Thereafter, a cumulative delay of nearly four years was recorded at three stages: processing mercy petitions by the Governor and President, and issuing execution warrants by the Sessions Court.Delay in Processing Mercy Petitions before the GovernorUnjustified Time Gap of Five-Months (July 2015 - January 2016): After the convicts filed their mercy petitions on July 10, 2015, prison authorities forwarded the mercy petitions on July 16, 2015, and the Home Department of Maharashtra received all relevant documents by July 20, 2015. However, it took the department over five months to prepare a three page note for the Governor, completed only on January 25, 2016.“it appears that nothing was done by the Home Department of the State Government for five months (152 days) after receiving confirmation that the convicts had not preferred a review petition. Further, a perusal of the note prepared for the benefit of the Hon'ble Governor shows that it consists of three and a half pages. The recommendation is in three lines in the last paragraph.”Unnecessary Correspondence: The court observed unnecessary delays in correspondence between the Home Department and prison authorities.“A lot of time was wasted on correspondence made by various officers. All this was avoidable. Immediately upon receipt of the mercy petitions, all the required information/documents ought to have been called for by the Home Ministry. That was not done. Perhaps the officers in the Home Ministry showed a lack of sensitivity. Ultimately, on 29th March 2016, mercy petitions were rejected by the Hon'ble Governor. Thus, the delay of 5 months between 16th July 2015 and 25th January 2016 is unexplained and unjustified.”Delay in Processing Mercy Petitions before the PresidentThe State Home Department informed the Under Secretary, Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) about the Governor's rejection of the mercy petitions and forwarded them, along with judgments from all courts and the rejection communication, to the Under Secretary on April 28, 2016.Correspondence between Centre and State (April 2016 ...

State Must Not Defeat Purpose Of Death Sentence By Showing Laxity In Implementation: Supreme Court

Amisha Shrivastava

The Court criticized delay of over 3 years caused by Maharashtra government, centre, and judiciary in executing death penalty of convicts in 2007 BPO employee rape and murder case.

Tags