14
Supreme Court Decision: The Supreme Court on Monday clarified in an important case related to the death penalty that Article 32 of the Constitution gives the court the right to recite the death sentence.
Supreme Court Decision: Supreme Court (Supreme Court) On Monday, he said that the death sentence under Article 32 can be challenged. The Supreme Court on Monday clarified in an important case related to the death penalty that Article 32 of the Constitution gives the court the right to recite the death sentence. The court gave this decision on the petition of Vasant Sampat Dupare, resident of Nagpur. Dupare was convicted of rape and murder of a four -year -old girl in April 2008. He took the girl with her chocolate with her and crushed her head with stones to erase the identity. A three -member bench of Justice Vikram Nath, Justice Sanjay Karol and Justice Sandeep Mehta admitted the petition filed under Article 32 of the convict, saying that procedural security measures have been violated in the case. The bench said that Article 32 gives the court the right to ensure that all constitutional guarantee and guidelines have been followed in cases related to death penalty.
No one should be deprived of fundamental rights
The court especially cited the “Manoj vs. Madhya Pradesh” case, in which strict guidelines were set in cases related to death penalty. The Supreme Court said that it is necessary to strictly comply with these security measures so that any convict is not deprived of fundamental rights like equal behavior, personal punishment and fair procedure. These rights are obtained by every person under Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution. This decision made it clear that the Supreme Court will not only give special emphasis on the severity of crime in the death penalty cases, but also on the fairness of the rights and procedures provided to the guilty. The court said that this corrective power is necessary to ensure justice and protect the values of the Constitution.
Dupare was punished in 2014
The apex court also said that a regular route cannot be allowed to reopen the exceptional scope of Article 32. The bench said that it would be right to reopen only those cases where there is a clear, specific violation of new procedural security measures, as these violations are so serious that if they are not corrected, they will weaken the basic rights such as the honor and fair process of the accused person. The apex court upheld the conviction but kept the 2017 outlook of the currently taken on the sentence. The bench placed the case before Chief Justice BR Gavai to list the case appropriate for hearing afresh. The sentence of the two -wheeler was confirmed by the apex court in 2014. His review petition against the decision of 26 November 2014 was rejected by the apex court on 3 May 2017.
Also read: Supreme Court lifted High Court’s ban, admission process will start again in paramedical courses of Madhya Pradesh
