DR.

RAM MANOHAR LOHIYA

NATIONAL LAW UNIVERSITY, LUCKNOW
2016-2017

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW- II
[SYNOPSIS]
Critical Analysis on Shatrughan Chauhan v. Union of India
SUBMITTED FOR THE PROJECT WORK UNDERTAKEN IN THE
PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF B.A. LL.B. (HONS.) 5 YEARS
INTEGRATED COURSE OF DR. RAM MANOHAR LOHIYA NLU,
LUCKNOW.

UNDER THE GUIDANCE OF: SUBMITTED BY:

Prof (Dr.) C.M. JARIWALA MARGARET ROSE
Dr. A.K. TIWARI ROLL NO. 79
Ms. ANKITA YADAV 4th SEMESTER
Dr. R.M.L.N.L.U.
TITLE OF CASE:

The title of the case is Shatrughan Chauhan and another v. Union Of India and others,
(2014) 3 SCC 1

BENCH:

The case was presided over by the three Judge Bench in the Supreme Court which comprised
of: P. Sathasivam, Shiva Kirti Singh and Ranjan Gogoi.

ISSUE:

1. Evaluation of circumstances under which death penalty can be commuted to life

imprisonment.

2. Evaluation of Article 72 of the Constitution of India.

HELD:

The Honorable Supreme Court held that death sentence of a condemned prisoner can be
commuted to life imprisonment on the ground of delay on the part of the government in
deciding the mercy plea. In a landmark verdict that can come as a relief to many death row
convicts.

Giving life term to 15 death row inmates, including four aides of forest brigand Veerappan,
the apex court also ruled that a death convict suffering from mental insanity and
schizophrenia cannot be hanged.

It overruled its own verdict in Devinderpal Singh Bhullars case in which it had held that
delay in deciding mercy plea cannot be a ground for commutation of death sentence.

The Court said Death sentence in such cases can be commuted to life imprisonment on the
ground of their mental illness. The judgment may have implications in various cases,
including the petitions filed by three death row convicts in the Rajiv Gandhi assassination
case who have challenged the Presidents rejection of their mercy plea less than three years
ago. Framing guidelines on disposal of mercy petitions and execution of death sentence, a
bench headed by Chief Justice P. Sathasivam ruled that convicts given death sentence must
be informed about the rejection of their mercy pleas and should be given a chance to meet
their family members before they are executed.
It also held that solitary confinement of a prisoner, including death row convict, is
unconstitutional and it should not be allowed in the prisons. The bench gave its verdict on a
batch of petitions filed by 15 death row inmates seeking its direction for commutation of their
sentence to life term on the grounds of delay in deciding mercy plea and mental illness. It
also said that execution of death sentence should be carried out only 14 days after rejection of
the mercy plea. The apex court also said that the prison authorities must provide legal aid to
prisoners facing death sentence so that they can approach courts for commutation of their
sentence on the ground of their illness and delay in deciding mercy plea by the government.

Pronouncing its judgment on 13 petitions filed by the 15 convicts whose execution of

sentence had been stayed by the apex court, the three-judge bench clarified that its directions
be implemented in all cases whether a person has been convicted under IPC or the anti-terror
law. The issue of communication of rejection of mercy plea assumes importance in view of
the controversy surrounding the execution of Parliament attack case convict Mohd Afzal as
there was allegation that his family members were not properly communicated about the
dismissal of his plea and subsequent hanging.

Earlier, a two-judge bench in April 2013 had held that long delay in disposing of mercy pleas
by the President or the governor of persons convicted under anti-terror laws or similar
statutes cannot be a ground for commutation of death sentence. The April 12, 2013 ruling
was pronounced while rejecting Bhullars plea for commutation of sentence on ground of
delay in deciding his mercy plea. At that time, there were over 20 convicts facing execution.

Later on, an apex court bench had granted relief to a condemned prisoner M.N. Das who had
sought conversion of his death sentence to life imprisonment on the ground of delay in
deciding his mercy petition. Justice Sathasivam, before taking over as CJI, had said that there
was a need for authoritative pronouncements by a larger bench or a Constitution Bench on
issues like mercy pleas to avoid conflicting views by smaller benches.

The 15 death row inmates on whose pleas the apex court delivered its verdict are sandalwood
smuggler Veerappans aides and others. The other death row convicts included Suresh,
Ramji, Gurmeet Singh, Praveen Kumar, Sonia and her husband Sanjeev, Sundar Singh and
Jafar Ali convicted in various cases. While Suresh, Ramji, Gurmeet Singh and Jafar Ali are
lodged in prisons in Uttar Pradesh, former Haryana MLA Ralu Ram Punias daughter Sonia
and her husband Sanjeev are jailed in Haryana. Praveen is in a Karnataka jail and Sundar
Singh is an inmate of a prison in Uttaranchal.Sonia and Sanjeev were awarded death penalty
for killing eight members of her family, including her parents and three children of her
brother in 2001.Gurmeet Singh was convicted for killing 13 of his family members in 1986.
Jafar Ali murdered his wife and five daughters. Suresh and Ramji killed five of their
relatives.