Smt.Triveniben & Ors. Vs. State of Gujarat on 7th February 1989 (Death Penalty Case)
| Case Name : | Triveniben vs. State of Gujarat, 1989 |
| Equivalent Citation: | 1989 AIR 1335, 1989 SCR (1) 509 |
| Date of Judgement : | 07/02/1989 |
| Court: | Supreme Court of India |
| Case No: | 1989 AIR 1335,1989 SCR (1) 509 |
| Case Type: | Criminal |
| Petitioner: | Smt. Triveniben & Ors. |
| Respondent: | State of Gujarat |
| Bench: | Oza, G.L. (J), Dutt, M.M. (J), Singh, K.N.(J), Shetty, K.J. (J), Sharma, L.M. (J) |
| Relevant Acts – | Constitution of India, Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, Indian Penal Code, 1960. |
RELEVANCE- This case is related to execution of death penalty and Article 14, 21 and 226 are also referred it in. Mercy petition is that type of petition when the accused sentenced with death penalty, he has a right to appeal to Governor and President of India for a limited period.
FACTS:
- Petitioner, Triveniben , who is sentenced to death in Sessions Case by the Sessions Judge for committing the Triple Murder of Vibha Narendra Dave, Gaurishankar Ishwarlal, and Ashaben Narendra Dave and the criminal appeal arising of these sentence was dismissed by the High Court on 19/01/1982 and Supreme Court also dismissed the appeal on 26/07/1982 and preferred this petition under Article 14, 21 and 226 of the Constitution and direct the authorities not to implement the order of execution until the mercy petition considered by the President of India.
- On 13/12/1985 the then President, Honorable, Shrii Gyani Zailsingh Visited Gujrat and the mercy petition handed over to him.
ISSUE RAISED:
- Whether prolonged delay in execution of the sentence of death rendered it inexecutable and entitle the accused to demand alternate sentence of imprisonment for life?
- What should be the starting point for computing this delay?
- What were the rights of condemned prisoners who had been sentenced to death but not executed?
- What could be the circumstances which should be considered along with the time that had been taken before the sentenced is executed?
ARGUMENTS:
Petitioner contended than the mercy petition is not decided yet ad therefore till it is decided the execution of death sentence should be stayed by this court.
JUDGEMENT:
- Court held that undue delay in execution of the sentence of death would entitle the condemned person to approach the court under Aricle 32.
- The delay which could be considered while considering the question of commutation of sentence of death into one of life imprisonment could only be from the date of judgement pronounced.
- The condemned prisoner is entitled to come to the court reuesting to examine, is it just and fair trial to allow the sentence of death to be executed.
- The condemned prisoner has to know that the judgement pronounced by the sessions court in the case of capiital punishment is not final unless confrimed by the High Court and if it would delay so the lesser sentence should be awarded.
CONCLUSION:
Many a times the subject of death penalty also come in front of Parliament as a rising issue. As it is said that it violates Article 21 of the Constitution. But this issue is remaining an issue not solved yet.
Written by Harshita Sharma (3rd Year, 6th Semester ) studying in Barkatullah University, Department of Law, Bhopal.
