HC says judges shouldn't be ‘bloodthirsty', commutes death sentence in murder case
Passing the judgment, Justice Sabyasachi Bhattacharyya said that the evolution of society has been towards a reformative approach towards penology, as opposed to a retributive approach.
Kolkata: Observing that judges should never be 'bloodthirsty', the Jalpaiguri Circuit Bench of the Calcutta High Court has ordered commutation of the death sentence of a man to life imprisonment for the murder of his maternal uncle.
Justice Bhattacharyya commuted the death sentence awarded to Aftab Alam by the Jalpaiguri sessions court for committing offence under Section 396 (dacoity with murder) to life sentence for the rest of his life, without any option of premature release for 20 years, unless exceptional circumstances are made out to the satisfaction of the court concerned.
'Judges should never be bloodthirsty. Hanging of murderers has never been too good for them,' Justice Bhattacharyya observed.
Upholding the conviction of Alam by the trial court for the murder of his maternal uncle at Dhupguri in Jalpaiguri district on July 28, 2023, while committing dacoity at his house along with five other associates, Justice Bhattacharyya, while passing the judgment earlier this week, said that the crime does not fall under the 'rarest of the rare' category.
Noting that in a landmark judgment in 1980 by the Supreme Court in the Bachan Singh versus State of Punjab case, a word of caution was put in, to the effect that 'judges should never be bloodthirsty'.
'The alteration of the names of jails from 'prisons' to 'correctional homes' in recent times is for a reason, reflecting the transition from the basic bloodthirsty instinct of society to take revenge to a more civilised policy of attempting to reform the accused, on the principle that one should hate the offence and not the offender,' Justice Bhattacharyya observed.
He said that there has been a debate around the world as to the retention of the death sentence as a punishment, however heinous and grave the offence may be.
'The anti-death penalty camp argues that if deterrence is taken to be a reason for punishment, a lifetime of imprisonment is as good as a death sentence. Rather, a lifetime behind bars, which denudes the convict of his freedom for his entire life, is a preferable form to punish him than death, which takes place in a flash,' he noted.
Justice Bhattacharyya observed that, pitting the pros and cons against each other, if a person is hanged or otherwise killed by dint of a death penalty, the damage done is irreversible.
He said that even if subsequently some new light is shed on the investigation or there is discovery of some new evidence or something to justify the reopening of the investigation, 'there would be no chance of bringing back a life which has already been taken; thus, the death penalty is irreversible.' Alam's lawyer argued that there was no evidence to show that the murder was pre-planned or cold-blooded or to conclude that the same fell under the category of 'rarest of the rare' cases and that the trial judge did not consider the possibility of reformation at all.
The additional public prosecutor, appearing for the state, contended that the crime was established beyond doubt and prayed that the capital punishment awarded to the appellant by the trial court be upheld.
Holding that the court finds no evidence adduced by the state that the convict is beyond reform, Justice Bhattacharyya said that the young age of Alam, who is in his twenties, is another mitigating factor which precludes awarding the death sentence.
Noting that Alam was residing at Delhi for a long time after leaving his maternal uncle's house at Dhupguri, where he had earlier stayed for some years, the high court said that the 'position of trust' approach cannot be applied, since at the time of the offence, the appellant was long gone from the shelter of his uncle.
It noted that the 'betrayal' angle, per se, does not justify the death penalty. PTI AMR ACD
This report is auto-generated from PTI news service. ThePrint holds no responsibility for its content.
Also Read: Death penalty is not justice, it is revenge
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Hans India
2 hours ago
- Hans India
SC takes note of photographs showing manual scavenging at apex court's gate
The Supreme Court has taken note of photographs showing manual scavenging and hazardous cleaning being done at one of the gates of the apex court. "We are also constrained to observe that photographs have been shown to us that the manual scavenging and hazardous cleaning is being done at gate F of this court as well. Let the concerned officer of the Public Works Department (PWD) file a reply to the above applications," a bench of Justices Sudhanshu Dhulia (since retired) and Aravind Kumar said in its August 6 order. Justice Dhulia retired on August 9. The top court was dealing with applications filed in a public interest litigation, which has raised the issue of manual scavenging. In its order, the bench made the East Delhi Municipal Corporation a party-respondent in the matter. It directed the corporation to file a response to the applications explaining why manual scavenging and hazardous cleaning were still going on with manual labour, exposing such workers to the risk of their lives and that too, without proper gear as shown in photographs attached to the plea. "It is made clear that if satisfactory reply is not received on the next date, we will have no option but to direct the registration of an FIR against such officer(s) who are exposing the workers to the risk of their lives," the bench said and posted the matter for hearing on September 10. In a verdict delivered in the matter in October 2023, the top court observed that manual scavengers have lived in bondage, systematically trapped in inhuman conditions for a long time. It had asked the Centre and states to completely eradicate manual scavenging across the country. Passing a slew of directions, the apex court asked the central and state governments to pay Rs 30 lakh as compensation to the next of kin of those who die while cleaning sewers.
Indian Express
4 hours ago
- Indian Express
‘Investigation in the train blast case is a sad comment on how little policing has changed since 1872'
There were two recent judgments in terror cases–the 2006 Mumbai train blasts and the 2008 Malegaon blasts judgments. The high court verdict acquitting 12 people for the train blasts (7/11) called the torture meted out to them as 'barbaric' and 'inhuman'–the use of the judgment as a precedent in cases of MCOCA was stayed by the Supreme Court while not interfering with the high court's findings on the men's innocence. The trial court in the Malegaon case said there was a strong suspicion, but no legal proof against the seven accused it acquitted, citing reasons including the lack of procedure followed by the prosecution. Sadaf Modak speaks with advocates Yug Chaudhry and Payoshi Roy, who represented the accused in the train blasts case, about procedures and safeguards in terror probes. While drafting the Indian Evidence Act, James Fitzjames Stephen had decreed confessions to police officers as inadmissible. This holds equally true today and even the new criminal laws bar the use of confessions and witness statements made before police officers. The investigation in the train blast case is a sad comment on how little policing has changed since 1872, despite the upgrade in resources and technique. In this case, torture was the investigative tool of choice whether it be by obtaining false confessions, or coerced signatures on make-believe recovery /seizure panchnamas concocted in the police station. Superior officers endorsed the use of torture, and often threatened the prisoners with it if they did not cooperate or if they complained to the judges. Remand judges and later the trial judge pretended that there were no signs of torture even when it was staring them in the face. It appears that investigating officers resorting to such fabrication are enabled by the judicial latitude they are assured of receiving in terror cases. The failure therefore is not one of technique or manner of probe but a crisis of impunity. The burden lies not only on courts but also on the State to strictly monitor these investigations and pull up erring officers. This is a case where the High Court has found that the police have tortured the accused to procure confessions and destroyed evidence of CDR that would exonerate the accused. Instead of immediately instituting a wide-ranging review of this botched investigation, the state has denied its falsity. This attitude is a disservice to the victims who deserve an honest investigation, like the high court itself observed, that there is no greater betrayal of victims of terror crimes than fabricated investigations. This judgment should serve as a clarion call to the political leadership that short-cuts in terror investigations are unacceptable. At present, sanction and prior approval for MCOCA (Maharashtra Control of Organised Crime Act) prosecution are given by an officer of the DIG Rank. When a terror offence of this magnitude is committed, officers at the highest level supervise the investigation. Seeking sanction from the DIG or the DGP of the state, who has been actively monitoring the investigation, is like an appeal from Ceaser to Ceaser's wife. In the 7/11 case, the approval for Act was granted without looking at the chargesheets, which allows DCPs to record confessions. One of the reasons the high court rejected the confessions is because prior approval was given without application of mind. Even under UAPA, sanction is sought from an authority appointed by the Central or state government. These safeguards have been reduced to a nullity. The authority granting sanction must be independent and quasi-judicial and must be able to scrutinise the material independently. Section 195 of the Indian Penal Code and now Section 230 of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita penalises giving of false evidence and fabricating evidence with the intent to procure a conviction in a capital case. It is punishable with life imprisonment. It is time this law is implemented. Responsible police officers of the highest to the lowest rank must be prosecuted under the law. Police officers cannot be prosecuted for failing to collect sufficient evidence or if a prosecution fails to prove the accused's guilt beyond reasonable doubt. However, in a case such as the 7/11 blasts where officers have lied on oath about recording contemporaneous confessions, where there is stark evidence of brutal torture, where officers have deliberately destroyed the accused's CDR despite repeated applications by the defence for the CDR knowing that would exonerate the accused–such criminal action from the custodians of the law must be prosecuted under the law. If this is not done, there will be no acknowledgement by the State that they have failed the victims, failed society and undermined national security.
Time of India
4 hours ago
- Time of India
Vandalism and cop injuries to be police evidence in high court
1 2 3 4 5 6 Kolkata: Cops in Kolkata and Howrah have registered nine FIRs across three police stations against those who attended the 'Nabanna Abhijan' on Saturday. They are accused of attacking cops, damaging public and private property, and indulging in violence and arson. Also, the organisers have been accused of violating the court order. Most cases have been drawn up under sections 189(2) (unlawful assembly), 191(3) (force or violence used by an unlawful assembly), 121(1) (voluntarily causing hurt), 132 (criminal force to any person being a public servant in the execution of his duty), 109 (attempt to murder), 61(2) (criminal conspiracy) of the BNS Act, 3 PDPP Act, and 9 WB MPPO Act. Those involved in the assault near J L Nehru Road might soon face organised crime charges, sources said. In Kolkata, six FIRs were lodged at New Market police station and one at Hare Street police station. While cops didn't specify if any names were mentioned in the FIRs, BJP claimed names of their functionaries like Ashok Dinda, Agnimitra Paul and Kaustuv Bagchi — who were seen at the J L Nehru Road flashpoint — were named in the suo motu complaints by police. You Can Also Check: Kolkata AQI | Weather in Kolkata | Bank Holidays in Kolkata | Public Holidays in Kolkata "Those who were present there on Saturday, those who disobeyed the Honourable High Court's orders, those who assaulted the police, those who threatened the police, and those who damaged govt and private property are being identified, and their names will certainly be included in the FIR," said Kolkata Police commissioner Manoj Varma on Sunday. Varma was at the hospital to check on police constable Prasanta Poddar (36) — the security guard of DC SSD Bidhisha Kalita. Poddar was among the three policemen admitted to the hospital after they sustained injuries at the hands of the vandals on Saturday. "He sustained head injuries but is otherwise stable," said Varma. Earlier on Friday, Lalbazar issued a photograph of Poddar being pinned to the ground by a protester while another protester was seen stomping his head. Sometime later, he was seen being rescued and escorted away by policemen while he was bleeding from his head. In total, five policemen were injured. Apart from Poddar, two others — ASI Jagabandhu Saha (58) and home guard Chaitanya Mahanta (30) — were also admitted to the trauma care centre of the hospital. Two other policemen — constable Nimai Mondal (44) of Tollygunge traffic guard and constable Mithun Ghosh (38) of Shakespeare Sarani police station — were discharged after preliminary treatment from the hospital. Ahead of the 'Nabanna Abhijan', police warned of strict action if Calcutta High Court's orders were disobeyed. Saturday saw a day-long chaos. City cops have filed seven FIRs but are yet to make any arrest. On Friday, Calcutta High Court reiterated that the protesters will ensure a peaceful protest and that the police will maintain the law-and-order situation. Various trader groups of Howrah Maidan, MG Road, Brabourne Road, and CR Avenue moved the HC, anticipating disruptions due to the march, considering last year's experience when the protest took an ugly turn and about 47 police personnel were injured and one lost his eyes. When asked about leader of opposition Suvendu Adhikari abusing Varma publicly, the police commissioner avoided the issue, saying, "The matter is under investigation, and at this moment, it would be inappropriate to comment." Stay updated with the latest local news from your city on Times of India (TOI). Check upcoming bank holidays , public holidays , and current gold rates and silver prices in your area.
