Referred to Larger Bench XXXI: Two Sets of Three-Judge Benches

Posted on by Rudrajyoti Nath Ray

There exists a clear conflict. It is necessary to have clarity.  

_____

Same-Day Sentencing in a Capital Offence violates Principles of Natural Justice and is opposed to Section 235(2) of The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.

Dattaraya v. State of Maharashtra, (2020) 14 SCC 290; Bhagwani v. State of Madhya Pradesh, Criminal Appeal Nos. 101-102 of 2022; Manoj & Ors. v. State of Madhya Pradesh, Criminal Appeal Nos. 248- 250 of 2015.

_____

Same-Day Conviction and Sentencing would not vitiate Sentence.

Shatrughna Baban Meshram v. State of Maharashtra, (2021) 1 SCC 596; Manoj Suryavanshi v. State of Chhatisgarh (2020) 4 SCC 451; Mohd. Mannan v. State of Bihar, (2019) 16 SCC 584; Vasanta Sampatha Dupare v. State of Maharashtra, (2018) 6 SCC 631; Mukesh v. State for NCT of Delhi, (2017) 6 SCC 1; B.A. Umesh v. High Court of Karnataka, (2017) 4 SCC 124.

_____

Manoj Pratap Singh v. State of Rajasthan, Criminal Appeal Nos. 910-911 of 2022 is an example, where ‘sufficient time’ for compliance with Section 235(2) was considered. Apprehension was recorded in Manoj & Ors. v. State of Madhya Pradesh, Criminal Appeal Nos. 248- 250 of 2015 relating to absence of a framework.

_____

Reference to a Larger Bench of Five Hon’ble Judges.

– Hon’ble Justice S. Ravindra Bhat, In Re: Mitigating Circumstances, Death Sentences, [Suo Motu Writ Petition (Criminal) No. 1 of 2022] decided on 19.09.2022.

'The Last Word' seeks to include not only wise and witty sayings but also curiosities. These words are not of obligation but of delight. I am not alone in my refusal to believe, law is tedious. For all who escaped these percipient eyes, mea culpa maxima. History, after all, has many cunning passages, contrived corridors and issues.