Jagmohan's Case:-
“The question of constitutional validity of Sec. 302, I.P.C. was discussed in detail by the SC in Jagmohan V/s State of U.P. Apart from the constitutional validity, the SC also discussed position in other countries, the structure of Indian Criminal law, various policies and bills proposed in the parliament , the extent of Judicial discretion etc. On the question of constitutional validity the Court observed:-
" The CR.P.C. Require that the accused must be questioned with regard to the circumstances appearing against him in the evidence. He is also questioned generally on the case and there is an opportunity for him to say whether he wants to say. In important cases like murder, the Court always gives a chance to the accused
…show more content…
302, I.P.C., life of convict is taken without any procedure established by law & therefore, it violates Art. 21 of the constitution .Thus, the SC settled this controversy long back in 1973. However even after Jagmohan's case this question came up again and again.”
Bachan Singh's Case:-
“The next important case, and which can be termed as a milestone in the Indian Criminal Jurisprudence is the case of Bachan Singh V/s State of Punjab . So strong were the principles laid down by the apex went in this case that the principles are being followed even now despite the fact that SC itself has expressed the need to review criminal jurisprudence from time to time.
Firstly we must understand why Jagomhan's Case was reviewed. After Cr. P.C. 1973, death sentence ceased to be the normal penalty for murder [354 (3)]. Another reason was that Maneka Gandhi's case gave a new interpretation to Art. 14,19and 21 and their inter-relationship. Main issues before the SC were constitutional validity of Sec. 302 of the I.P.C. as well as constitutional validity of Sec. 354 (3) of CR.P.C..While answering the question of reasonableness of death penalty, the constitution bench also discussed various other issues. These issues
In this case the precident was set for the American criminal justice system. The supreme court had clearly defined that how important was it was the
On September 12th, Carmela Buhbut, a battered wife who shot her husband to death 31 times from a close range, was sentenced to seven years imprisonment. She then appealed to the Supreme Court against the severity of the sentence. No less than three different justices held the complicated appeal- Bach, Kedmi and Dorner. All three of them, agreed that there is no doubt, that taking a person’s life is a crime which Buhbut should be punished for. However, only of them, justice Kedmi, thought the appeal should be dismiss in limine.
... be found in Mr. Hill’s case given he position set out by the majority judgement in this case.
Capital Punishment Essays - For the Common Good. Putting to death people judged to have committed certain extreme Terrible crimes are a practice of ancient standing, but in the United States. in the second half of the twentieth century, it has become a very controversial issue. Changing views on this difficult issue led the Supreme Court to abolish capital punishment in 1972 but later upheld it in 1977. The 'Standard' of the 'Standard' Although capital punishment is what the people want, there are many.
Subsequently, one of the main components of the procedural limitation is innocent until proven guilty, which brings about the right to a Grand Jury- a panel that determines whether or not there is a need to go to trial. As a result, a guilty verdict in criminal cases is determined with evidence that is sufficient and that must be proved “‘beyond a reasonable doubt’” (pg.131), so there is an immense need to increase the chances for the respect of “reasonable doubt” (pg.
Nobody has the right to take anyone else’s life in their own hands not even the Criminal Justices System. Currently, there are 31 states that have the death penalty and 19 states on death penalty bans. Banning the death penalty is important to mankind because no one’s life should be taken away from them. The individual is punished because he or she committed a serious crime such as murder and they are punished for taking someone else’s life, it does not make sense if the criminal justice system then takes his or her life in
Champion, D. J. (2009). Leading U.S. Supreme Court Cases in Criminal Justice: Briefs and Key Terms. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education.
The capital punishment has been cited as a reasonable sentence by those who advocate for retribution. This is essentially when it comes to justice so that people take full responsibility for their individual actions. Studies have proved that the decision to take away life of a person because they committed a certain crime serves to perpetuate the crime in question. It also serves to enhance the progress of organized and violent crime. It has been noted that various flaws in the justice system has led to the wrong conviction of innocent people. On the other hand, the guilty have also been set free, and a plethora of several cases has come up when a critical look at the capital punishment has been undertaken. Killers hardly kill their victims deliberately, but they probably act on anger, passion, or impulsively. In this regard, it is not proper to convict them exclusively without
After a person suspected of murder has been the trial process begin. During this stage the police will give the evidence they have complied to the prosecution. The prosecution will make a determi...
Life is a right to every living being and to kill anybody is violating the right of the respective person. United Nation General Assembly (UNGA) adopted the Universal Declaration of Human Rights in year 1945 which identifies the right to life for every human being (Death Penalty in International Law, n.d.). The law was adopted to protect the life of the convict and recognized that no one should have right to take away anyone’s life. Furthermore, in 2007 and 2008, UNGA once again passed resolution to call the death penalty as moratorium and this resolution was advocated in all countries of world (Death Penalty in International Law, n.d.). Although this is not a legal law accepted by all countries but most countries did adopt it as a law by abolishing capital punishment in law. Additionally, there is one more law in the Statue of the International Criminal Court which has eliminated death penalty from its jurisdiction since 1998 (The Death Penalty, 2007). Every government of the world need to understand the severity of the death punishment and must realize the value of life for each human being. Governments should respect life and safeguard it for its citizen.
all judiciary cases in which any fact is involved,) or may they act by representatives, freely and
rather given a long waiting period. If the criminal is put to death, it is
(Baude, 21). This quote provides details of why the finality in the decisions regarding death may not accurately represent the justice the accused deserves. It augments the ultimate overarching point made by Scheck and Rust-Tierney that we should not determine death. Despite the strong points made throughout the debate, there were key issues that Schneck and Rust-Tierney adequately refuted. The first was their failure when they lacked a counter to Scheidegger’s point on how inmates are often treated in the facilities themselves.
The judicial statement of Roskill LJ observed in The Albazero [1977] AC774 held plenty of arguments in modern world today. To reach an extent of agree or disagree the judicial statement, it should be critically analysed from a legal perspective:
The judge also has the final authority to pronounce contempt of court in case of breach of discipline. In a civilized society, the court system is in vogue for the sake of justice. The judiciary is considered to be one of the four main pillars of democracy. In the present play, Vijay Tendulkar chooses a term of judicial register as the title of his play to make a powerful comment on a society with a heavy patriarchal bias that makes justice impossible and that converts the august judicial system into an instrument of oppression of women and the vulnerable. Ideally, justice can be provided only if the judge and the judicial system are objectively detached.