Supreme Court issues notice to Jharkhand HC over long-pending verdict after 10 convicts file petition
The petitioners had approached the Jharkhand High Court between 2018 and 2019, challenging their convictions by a lower court. Despite the completion of hearings in 2022-23, the High Court has yet to deliver its verdict, which prompted the convicts to move apex court.
Out of the 10 petitioners, six were sentenced to death and the remaining four to life imprisonment. Nine of them are currently lodged in Birsa Munda Central Jail in Hotwar, Ranchi, while one has recently been released on bail from Dumka jail.
A bench comprising Justice Suryakant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi observed that the judge who reserved judgment in all these appeals is the same in each case, raising questions about the prolonged delay.
Appearing for the petitioners, advocate Fauzia Shakil argued that withholding a verdict for years after hearings are concluded constitutes a violation of Article 21 of the Constitution, which guarantees the right to life and personal liberty, including the right to speedy justice.
Shakil highlighted the mental anguish faced by the convicts due to the delay, especially those awaiting execution.
She cited the Supreme Court's ruling in HPA International vs Bhagwandas, where the court expressed concern over the practice of reserving judgments indefinitely.
The petition also referred to the Jharkhand High Court Rules (2001), which mandate that judgments must be delivered within six weeks of the conclusion of arguments.
Further, citing previous Supreme Court rulings related to sentence suspension, the advocate pointed out that convicts who have already served eight years of actual sentence are, in most cases, eligible for bail.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Scroll.in
26 minutes ago
- Scroll.in
‘Is this a joke?': Gauhati HC on allotment of 3,000 bighas of land to private company in Dima Hasao
The Gauhati High Court recently questioned the allotment of 3,000 bighas, or about 4 sq km, of land in Assam's Dima Hasao district to a private company to set up a cement factory, directing the state government to furnish the policy under which 'such a huge chunk of land' could be given away. '3000 bighas allotted to a private company?' Live Law quoted Justice Sanjay Kumar Medhi as verbally saying on August 12. 'We know how barren the land is…? What kind of decision is this? Is this some kind of joke or what? Your [company's] need is not the public interest is the issue.' The case pertained to the allocation of a plot of land measuring 2,000 bighas in the district to Mahabal Cement Private Limited in October 2024, The Indian Express reported. In November, the private company was allotted an additional adjacent plot measuring 1,000 bighas. Dima Hasao is a tribal-majority hill district in Assam. It is administered under the provisions of the Sixth Schedule of the Constitution through an autonomous body, the North Cachar Hills Autonomous Council. The Sixth Schedule governs the administration of tribal areas in Assam, Meghalaya, Tripura and Mizoram. The order allotting the land to the cement factory in October 2024 was issued by the additional secretary (revenue) of the North Cachar Hills Autonomous Council. It stated that the purpose of the allocation was to set up a cement plant, the newspaper reported. Last week, two petitions were heard in the court about this allotment. One of the petitions was filed by a group of locals who alleged that they were being evicted from their land to build the cement factory, The Indian Express reported. The initial petition had been filed earlier this year by Mahabal Cement Private Limited, which sought protection from 'disturbances created by local villagers' in construction work. In its order on August 12, the court said that 'a cursory glance into the facts of the case would reveal that the land which has been sought to be allotted is about 3,000 bighas, which itself appears to be extraordinary'. It directed the state government to obtain the records containing the policy to 'allot such a huge chunk of land measuring 3,000 bighas' to a factory. It further noted that the area involved was Umrangso in the district, which was known to be 'an environment hotspot containing hot spring, stop over for migratory birds, wildlife, etc.'
Hans India
26 minutes ago
- Hans India
SC trashes plea challenging 2024 Maharastra polls
The Supreme Court on Monday dismissed a petition challenging the 2024 Maharashtra Assembly elections on grounds of alleged irregularities in votes cast after 6 p.m.. A bench of Justices M.M. Sundresh and N. Kotiswar Singh refused to interfere with the decision of the Bombay High Court that had dismissed a writ petition claiming that nearly 76 lakh votes — 6.8 per cent of the total — were "illegally" cast after the official polling hours on November 20, 2024. In an order passed on June 25 this year, the Bombay HC had termed the writ petition —which relied on an RTI response obtained by activist Venkatesh Nayak stating that the Election Commission of India (ECI) did not have records of post-6 p.m. votes — a "gross abuse of the process of law". A bench of Justices G.S. Kulkarni and Arif S. Doctor had observed that petitioner Chetan Chandrakant Ahire, a voter from Mumbai's Vikhroli constituency, had no locus standi to challenge elections across all the constituencies in Maharashtra. "It is a relief, too far-fetched, that too on the basis of no cause of action as the facts clearly demonstrate," stated the Justice Kulkarni-led Bench in its judgement. It further disapproved the reliance on newspaper articles and third-party RTI applications, saying: "We are of the clear opinion that merely on political opinions or on unsubstantiated newspaper reports, a petition under Article 226 cannot at all be maintained." It added that "there is no other material whatsoever, much less of any authenticity, to the effect that there was any malpractice, fraud or complaint of any nature in regard to the voting at the closing hours of the poll, i.e. at about 6 p.m." The Bombay High Court had also rejected the prayer to revert to paper ballots, citing the Supreme Court rulings upholding the use of Electronic Voting Machines (EVMs). "We have no manner of doubt that this writ petition needs to be summarily rejected. It is accordingly rejected. The hearing of this petition has practically taken the whole day, leaving aside our urgent cause list, and for such reason the petition would certainly warrant dismissal with cost, however, we refrain from doing so," the Justice Kulkarni-led Bench had observed.
The Hindu
26 minutes ago
- The Hindu
Kerala HC reserves order in PIL against posting of Thomas Isaac as Vijnana Keralam adviser
The Kerala High Court has reserved for orders a petition questioning the appointment of former Finance Minister T.M. Thomas Isaac as adviser to the Vijnana Keralam initiative of the State government. A public interest litigation (PIL) had been filed questioning his appointment. Earlier this year, the High Court had issued notice to Dr. Isaac on the basis of the PIL. It also appointed an amicus curiae to assist it in the PIL.
