Criminal Justice and fundamental rights

1. Criminal Justice and Fundamental Rights
RAJIV GANDHI NATIONAL UNIVERSITY OF LAW
Mayuri Vyas
18014
Group 2
Topic: A DISCRETIONARY POWER OF PARDON AND
AN INSIGHT OF YAKUB MEMON CASE

2. Types of Pardon
Pardon
Commutation
Reprieve
Respite
Remission
President or Governor on the
basis of the scrutiny of all the
relevant information can come to
a different conclusion from that
established by the court.
PARDONING POWER
President
Governor
Article 72
Article 161
Research Question:
“Is there a need of Uniform Guidelines for the Mercy Petition of Death
Penalty?”
Objective
A need to evolve uniform guiding principles so that the President exercise pardoning
power uniformly to impart justice and bring a balance with individual interest and the
public welfare.

3. Section 302 of Indian Penal Code 1860
provides for the death penalty or capital
Punishment in the cases of Murder.
Statistics
2018– 162 death sentences
2017--108 death sentences
Madhya Pradesh has seen
the largest number of death
sentences levied in 2018.
Clauses (1) and (2) of Article 6
Bachan Singh v. State of Punjab
DEATH PENALTY AND MERCY PETITION
Provided Constitutional Validity of
Death Penalty
Rarest of Rare cases
International Covenant on Civil and
Political Rights
ICCPR
death penalty should not
be applied arbitrarily
it should be enforced only
for most serious crimes
Peoples' Union for Democratic Rights
(PUDR) v. Union of India and Ors.
•The Principles Of Natural Justice
•Certainty
•Reasonable Time
•Information Of Death Sentence
•Proper Legal Assistance
Essential safeguards in the
conviction of the death sentence.

4. Arbitrariness
Unreasonableness
Violation of human Rights
Violation of Principles of
Natural Justice
Politicisation of Power
Bikas Chatterjee vs. Union of
India
constitutional authority is
functioning with the application
of the mind
The President's order cannot,
however, be subject to judicial
review on its merits.
Judicial Review of Pardon
Kehar Singh and anr. etc. v.
Union of India and anr.
Maru Ram etc. v. Union of
India and anr.
the power of the President, falls
squarely within the judicial sphere
may be tested by the court through
judicial review.
Statement of Problem and Possible Conclusion
No Uniform Guidelines
Kehar Singh and anr. etc. v. Union
of India and anr.
Article 72 empowers President
and no further guidelines is
required.

5. CASE STUDY: “Travesty of Justice”
Yakub Abdul Razak Memon v. State of Maharashtra and Ors.
WRIT PETITION (CRL.) NO.135 OF 2015
•Bombay Blast of 1993.
•actively involved in hawala transactions
•Trial under TADA court by P.D. Kode. J.
[Terrorist and Disruptive Activities
(Prevention) Act]
Facts of the case
Justice Dipak Misra
penned the judgment
as Travesty of Justice.
Debate over
Execution Open Court Hearing + 30 mins oral hearing not
given
Mohd. Arif alias Ashfaq v. Registrar, Supreme
Court of India and Ors.
14 days notice period was not given after
rejection of Mercy Petition.
Shatrughan Chauhan and Anr. v. Union of
India and Ors

6. Chronology of Memon’s Execution
Date Event
27 July 2007 Found guilty by TADA court.
21 March 2013 Supreme Court confirmed Death sentence.
30 July 2013 Review Petition rejected without open court hearing.
6 August 2013 Brother filed a mercy petition to President and Governor.
1 June 2014 Review petition heard in open court.
9 April 2015 Review Petition dismissed.
30 April 2015 Death warrant issued for 30 July 2015.
22 May 2015 Curative Petition filed.
21 July 2015 Curative Petition rejected.
28 July 2015 Another Curative petition filed for insufficient quorum.
29 July 2015 Curative petition rejected. Mercy Petition filed to President
and Governor which were further rejected.
30 July 2015 Executed at 6.30 AM in Yerwada Jail.

7. Thank
You