UNION OF INDIA Vs. V. SRIHARAN @ MURUGAN
LAWS(SC)-2015-12-10
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Decided on December 02,2015

UNION OF INDIA Appellant
VERSUS
V. Sriharan @ Murugan Respondents


Referred Judgements :-

RAI SAHIB RAM JAWAYA KAPUR VS. STATE OF PUNJAB [REFERRED TO]
K M NANAVATI VS. STATE OF BOMBAY NOW MAHARASHTRA [REFERRED TO]
GOPAL VINAYAK GODSE VS. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA [REFERRED TO]
PREM CHAND GARG VS. EXCISE COMMISSIONER U P [REFERRED TO]
JAGMOHAN SINGH VS. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH [REFERRED TO]
G V RAMANAIAH VS. SUPERINTENDENT OF CENTRAL JAIL RAJAHMUNDRY [REFERRED TO]
G V RAMANAIAH VS. SUPERINTENDENT OF CENTRAL JAIL RAJAHMUNDRY [REFERRED TO]
SAMBHA JA KRISHAN JI VS. STATE OR MAHARASHTRA [REFERRED TO]
G KRISHTA GOUD AND J BHOOMAIAH VS. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH STATE OF PUNJAB VS. AJIT SINGH:AJIT SINGH [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH VS. RATAN SINGH [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH VS. RATAN SINGH [REFERRED TO]
RAJENDRA PRASAD KUNJUKUNJU JANARDHANAN SHEO SHANKER DUBEY VS. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH:STATE OF KERALA:STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH [REFERRED TO]
DALBIR SINOH VS. STATE OF PUNJAB [REFERRED TO]
BACHAN SINGH STATE OF PUNJAB AND MAL SINGH SUNIL BATRA NATHU SINGH KARTAR SINGH AND UJAGAR SINGH SHER SINGH SUNIL BATRA MAL SINGH NIRPAL SINGH JAGMOHAN SINGH UJAGAR SINGH VS. UNION OF INDIA [REFERRED TO]
BACHAN SINGH STATE OF PUNJAB AND MAL SINGH SUNIL BATRA NATHU SINGH KARTAR SINGH AND UJAGAR SINGH SHER SINGH SUNIL BATRA MAL SINGH NIRPAL SINGH JAGMOHAN SINGH UJAGAR SINGH VS. UNION OF INDIA [REFERRED TO]
SOHAN LAL VS. ASHA RAM [REFERRED TO]
MARU RAM BHIMWA RAM SHANKER KRISHNA RAGHUBIR SINGH RAMPUJA SINGH NIRBHAI SINGH BALKRISHAN GUPTA VENY SINGH BABULAL GAUTAM OM PRAKASH NAGEBHUSHANAM PATNAIK RAGHUNATH SINGH JAGIR SINGH VS. UNION OF INDIA [REFERRED TO]
HANUMANT DASS STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH VS. VINAY KUMAR:VINAY KUMAR [REFERRED TO]
MACHHI SINGH VS. STATE OF PUNJAB [REFERRED TO]
MACHHI SINGH VS. STATE OF PUNJAB [REFERRED TO]
RANJIT SINGH ALIAS RODA VS. UNION TERRITORY OF CHANDIGARH [REFERRED TO]
K NAGARAJ D SHANKARAN D SUBBA RAJU VS. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH:CHIEF SECRETARY OF ANDHRA PRADESH [REFERRED TO]
T VENKATA REDDY VS. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH [REFERRED TO]
BHAGIRATH RAKESH KAUSHIK VS. DELHI ADMINISTRATION:DELHI ADMINISTRATION [REFERRED TO]
A R ANTULAY VS. R S NAYAK [REFERRED TO]
KEHAR SINGH VS. UNION OF INDIA [REFERRED TO]
ASHOK KUMAR ALIAS GOLU VS. UNION OF INDIA [REFERRED TO]
SAT PAL ALIAS SADHU VS. STATE OF HARYANA [REFERRED TO]
SUPREME COURT ADVOCATES ON RECORD ASSOCIATION S P GUPTA VS. UNION OF INDIA [REFERRED TO]
KARTAR SINGH KRIPA SHANKAR RAI VS. STATE OF PUNJAB [REFERRED TO]
S R BOMMAI VS. UNION OF INDIA [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF PUNJAB VS. KESAR SINGH [REFERRED TO]
D K BASU ASHOK K JOHRI VS. STATE OF WEST BENGAL :STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH [REFERRED TO]
SUPREME COURT BAR ASSOCIATION VS. UNION OF INDIA [REFERRED TO]
STATE VS. NALINI [REFERRED TO]
SUTHENTHIRARAJA ALIAS SANTHAN VS. STATE [REFERRED TO]
LAXMAN NASKAR VS. UNION OF INDIA [REFERRED TO]
L AND L MC NEIL LIMITED VS. GOVERNMENT OF TAMIL NADU [REFERRED TO]
SUBHASH CHANDER VS. KRISHAN LAL [REFERRED TO]
BHAGWAN VS. STATE OF RAJASTHAN [REFERRED TO]
JAYAWANT DATTATRAY SURYARAO VS. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA [REFERRED TO]
PRAKASH DHAWAN KHAIRNAR PATIL VS. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA [REFERRED TO]
RAM ANUP SINGH VS. STATE OF BIHAR [REFERRED TO]
DELHI ADMINISTRATION VS. MANOHAR LAL [REFERRED TO]
ASLAM ALIAS BHURE VS. UNION OF INDIA [REFERRED TO]
STATE GOVERNMENT OF NCT OF DELHI VS. PREM RAJ [REFERRED TO]
NAZIR KHAN VS. STATE OF DELHI [REFERRED TO]
GOVT OF ANDHRA PRADESH VS. M T KHAN [REFERRED TO]
PEOPLES UNION FOR CIVIL LIBERTIES VS. UNION OF INDIA [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH VS. JOHRI MAL [REFERRED TO]
SUSHIL KUMAR SHARMA VS. UNION OF INDIA [REFERRED TO]
MD MUNNA VS. UNION OF INDIA [REFERRED TO]
EPURU SUDHAKAR VS. GOVT OF A P [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF RAJASTHAN VS. KASHI RAM [REFERRED TO]
ALOKE NATH DUTTA VS. STATE OF WEST BENGAL [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF HARYANA VS. MAHENDER SINGH [REFERRED TO]
PRAJEET KUMAR SINGH VS. STATE OF BIHAR [REFERRED TO]
SWAMY SHRADDANANDA ALIAS MURALI MANOHAR MIS VS. STATE [REFERRED TO]
N KANNADASAN VS. AJOY KHOSE [REFERRED TO]
SANTOSH KUMAR SATISHBHUSHAN BARIYAR VS. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF WEST BENGAL VS. COMMITTEE FOR PROTECTION OF DEMOCRATIC [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF HARYANA VS. JAGDISH [REFERRED TO]
LALU PRASAD YADAV VS. STATE OF BIHAR [REFERRED TO]
ZAMEER AHMED LATIFUR REHMAN SHEIKH VS. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA [REFERRED TO]
ATBIR VS. GOVT OF N C T OF DELHI [REFERRED TO]
RAMESHBHAI CHANDUBHAI RATHOD VS. STATE OF GUJARAT [REFERRED TO]
B A UMESH VS. REGR GEN HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF U P VS. RAKESH KUMAR KESHARI [REFERRED TO]
L K VENKAT VS. UNION OF INDIA [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF U P VS. SANJAY KUMAR [REFERRED TO]
SANGEET VS. STATE OF HARYANA [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF GUJARAT VS. HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE R.A.MEHTA [REFERRED TO]
JUSTICE CHANDRASHEKARAIAH VS. JANEKERE C. KRISHNA [REFERRED TO]
MOHINDER SINGH VS. STATE OF PUNJAB [REFERRED TO]
YAKUB ABDUL RAZAK VS. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA, THROUGH CBI, BOMBAY [REFERRED TO]
KRISHNAN VS. STATE OF HARYANA [REFERRED TO]
SHATRUGHAN CHAUHAN VS. UNION OF INDIA [REFERRED TO]
V. SRIHARAN @ MURUGAN VS. UNION OF INDIA [REFERRED TO]
PRAVASI BHALAI SANGATHAN VS. UNION OF INDIA [REFERRED TO]
UNION OF INDIA VS. V. SRIHARAN @ MURUGAN [REFERRED TO]
VIKRAM SINGH AND ORS. VS. UNION OF INDIA (UOI) AND ORS. [REFERRED TO]



Cited Judgements :-

P. VEERA BHAARATHI VS. STATE OF TAMIL NADU [LAWS(MAD)-2021-11-120] [REFERRED TO]
OM PRAKASH SRIVASTAVA @ BABLOO VS. STATE OF U.P. AND ANR. [LAWS(ALL)-2016-5-127] [REFERRED TO]
IN REFERENCE RECEIVED FROM 3RD ADDITIONAL SESSIONS JUDGE SINGROULI HEAD QUARTER WAIDHAN (M.P. VS. RAMJAG BIND [LAWS(MPH)-2022-12-175] [REFERRED TO]
VIVEK JAISWAL VS. STATE OF M P AND OTHERS [LAWS(MPH)-2018-12-36] [REFERRED TO]
AMBRISH KUMAR VERMA VS. STATE OF U.P. [LAWS(ALL)-2024-5-91] [REFERRED TO]
RAMCHANDRA VS. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH [LAWS(CHH)-2022-9-123] [REFERRED TO]
GANJU YADAV VS. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH [LAWS(CHH)-2023-9-50] [REFERRED TO]
HARIBHAU VS. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA [LAWS(BOM)-2024-11-33] [REFERRED TO]
MEHANDI KASIM JENUL ABIDIN SHAIKH VS. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA [LAWS(BOM)-2024-1-241] [REFERRED TO]
SHIVPRASAD BALGOVIND KESARI VS. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA [LAWS(BOM)-2023-6-316] [REFERRED TO]
SURENDRA MAHTO VS. STATE OF BIHAR [LAWS(PAT)-2021-10-11] [REFERRED TO]
RADHESHYAM BHAGWANDAS SHAH @ LALA VAKIL VS. STATE OF GUJARAT [LAWS(SC)-2022-5-60] [REFERRED TO]
B. SALMA MAHAJABEEN VS. GOVERNMENT OF TAMIL NADU [LAWS(MAD)-2021-3-203] [REFERRED TO]
PULI RAMADEVI AND ORS. VS. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH AND ORS. [LAWS(TLNG)-2018-10-63] [REFERRED TO]
SIKKANDER VS. STATE [LAWS(MAD)-2021-12-136] [REFERRED TO]
TATTU LODHI @ PANCHAM LODHI VS. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH [LAWS(SC)-2016-9-20] [REFERRED TO]
CHANDRASHEKARA VS. STATE OF KARNATAKA [LAWS(KAR)-2020-10-90] [REFERRED TO]
ANU SHANTHI VS. STATE OF KERALA [LAWS(KER)-2024-5-168] [REFERRED TO]
NAGINA RAI S/O LATE HARAKH RAI, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE VS. THE STATE OF BIHAR [LAWS(PAT)-2016-12-64] [REFERRED TO]
DEVARAJAN VS. STATE OF KERALA [LAWS(KER)-2022-1-173] [REFERRED TO]
ARELLI ASHOKA BHAI VS. STATE OF TELANGANA [LAWS(TLNG)-2021-6-104] [REFERRED TO]
P SEKAR VS. STATE REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT OF TAMIL NADU DEPARTMENT OF HOME, FORT ST GEORGE, CHENNAI [LAWS(MAD)-2017-9-281] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF GUJARAT VS. LAL SINGH @ MANJIT SINGH [LAWS(SC)-2016-6-7] [REFERRED TO]
BRIJ PAL SINGH AND ANOTHER VS. STATE OF U P [LAWS(ALL)-2017-6-65] [REFERRED TO]
SUNITA DEVI VS. STATE OF BIHAR [LAWS(SC)-2024-5-77] [REFERRED TO]
TONY @ THOMAS VS. STATE OF KERALA [LAWS(KER)-2022-10-309] [REFERRED TO]
RAM NARESH RAI, SON OF GANGESHWAR RAI, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE VS. THE STATE OF BIHAR THROUGH THE CHIEF SECRETARY, GOVT. OF BIHAR, PATNA [LAWS(PAT)-2016-11-59] [REFERRED TO]
VIJAY KUMAR VS. STATE OF JAMMU & KASHMIR [LAWS(SC)-2018-11-79] [REFERRED TO]
JITENDRA @ KALLA VS. STATE OF GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI [LAWS(SC)-2018-10-70] [REFERRED TO]
THE REGISTRAR GENERAL, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA VS. RAMESH A. NAIKA AND OTHER [LAWS(KAR)-2017-9-146] [REFERRED TO]
KARTIK SUBRAMANIAM VS. UNION OF INDIA [LAWS(DLH)-2021-1-52] [REFERRED TO]
CHAMAN LAL VS. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH [LAWS(CHH)-2023-4-41] [REFERRED TO]
AMARNATH PANDEY VS. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH [LAWS(CHH)-2019-5-100] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF A.P. VS. MOHAMMAD ABDUL SAMMAD MUNNA [LAWS(APH)-2024-5-49] [REFERRED TO]
STATE VS. RAJESH KUMAR [LAWS(KER)-2019-1-18] [REFERRED TO]
E.AYYAPPAN VS. STATE OF TAMIL NADU [LAWS(MAD)-2022-3-154] [REFERRED TO]
SANGTI PHOM VS. STATE OF NAGALAND [LAWS(GAU)-2017-9-36] [REFERRED TO]
RAJENDRA NARANG VS. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH [LAWS(CHH)-2022-9-17] [REFERRED TO]
CHINGDU VS. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH [LAWS(CHH)-2022-9-83] [REFERRED TO]
MOHAMAD SHAMIM KHAN VS. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH [LAWS(CHH)-2022-10-52] [REFERRED TO]
RAMPRASAD GUPTA SON OF VISHWANATH GUPTA VS. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA [LAWS(BOM)-2019-3-11] [REFERRED TO]
SANATAN GOSWAMI @ THAKUR VS. STATE OF WEST BENGAL [LAWS(CAL)-2022-8-68] [REFERRED TO]
GOURAB MONDAL VS. STATE OF WEST BENGAL [LAWS(CAL)-2022-5-121] [REFERRED TO]
USHA RANI VS. STATE [LAWS(DLH)-2018-3-106] [REFERRED TO]
GOVIND VS. STATE [LAWS(DLH)-2018-3-110] [REFERRED TO]
BHAGGI @ BHAGIRATH @ NARAN VS. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH [LAWS(SC)-2024-2-3] [REFERRED TO]
SANDEEP VS. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND [LAWS(SC)-2024-10-16] [REFERRED TO]
MANOJ PRATAP SINGH VS. STATE OF RAJASTHAN [LAWS(SC)-2022-6-20] [REFERRED TO]
JASWANT SINGH VS. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH [LAWS(SC)-2023-1-34] [REFERRED TO]
ABU SALEM ABDUL KAYYUM ANSARI VS. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA [LAWS(SC)-2022-7-18] [REFERRED TO]
MUKESH AND ANOTHER VS. STATE FOR NCT OF DELHI AND OTHERS. [LAWS(SC)-2017-5-43] [REFERRED TO]
ATBIR VS. STATE OF NCT OF DELHI [LAWS(SC)-2022-4-93] [REFERRED TO]
VEERENDRA VS. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH [LAWS(SC)-2022-5-54] [REFERRED TO]
KANCHI VS. STATE OF WEST BENGAL [LAWS(CAL)-2024-4-7] [REFERRED TO]
SUBAIDA VS. STATE OF KERALA [LAWS(KER)-2020-1-103] [REFERRED TO]
YASER ARAFATH VS. STATE [LAWS(MAD)-2021-3-407] [REFERRED TO]
KARAN SINGH VS. STATE OF M. P. [LAWS(MPH)-2021-6-61] [REFERRED TO]
HASEEN KHAN VS. STATE OF M.P. [LAWS(MPH)-2021-6-88] [REFERRED TO]
PHOOL SINGH VS. STATE OF U.P. [LAWS(ALL)-2022-4-145] [REFERRED TO]
K.DEVARAJ VS. STATE OF TAMIL NADU [LAWS(MAD)-2022-1-193] [REFERRED TO]
STATE VS. SANTHOSHKUMAR [LAWS(MAD)-2021-4-203] [REFERRED TO]
K.V. KOMARASAMY VS. GOVERNMENT OF TAMIL NADU [LAWS(MAD)-2022-2-10] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF M. P. VS. SOBRAN SINGH [LAWS(MPH)-2019-6-10] [REFERRED TO]
GULSHER @ BHOOT VS. STATE [LAWS(ALL)-2017-11-121] [REFERRED TO]
SATYAVRAT RAI VS. STATE OF U.P. [LAWS(ALL)-2021-4-29] [REFERRED TO]
TONY VS. STATE OF KERALA [LAWS(KER)-2021-11-308] [REFERRED TO]
ZOHRA SHEIKH VS. STATE (GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI) [LAWS(DLH)-2017-2-46] [REFERRED TO]
VIKRAM RANA VS. STATE (GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI) [LAWS(DLH)-2019-1-330] [REFERRED TO]
HARIHAR VS. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH [LAWS(CHH)-2023-3-52] [REFERRED TO]
PARDESHI RAM VS. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH [LAWS(CHH)-2020-6-27] [REFERRED TO]
RAMBHAROS S/O HUKUM SAI VS. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH [LAWS(CHH)-2024-10-3] [REFERRED TO]
MONIRUL MOLLA VS. STATE OF WEST BENGAL [LAWS(CAL)-2022-4-149] [REFERRED TO]
MD. KHALID VS. STATE OF WEST BENGAL [LAWS(CAL)-2024-4-25] [REFERRED TO]
TARA SINGH VS. UNION OF INDIA [LAWS(SC)-2016-6-25] [REFERRED TO]
MUTHURAMALINGAM & ORS. VS. STATE REP. BY INSP. OF POLICE [LAWS(SC)-2016-7-42] [REFERRED TO]
SUBEG SINGH VS. UNION TERRITORY OF CHANDIGARH AND OTHERS [LAWS(P&H)-2019-9-48] [REFERRED TO]
ARVIND SINGH VS. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA [LAWS(SC)-2020-4-45] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF KERALA VS. NARENDRA KUMAR [LAWS(KER)-2024-4-170] [REFERRED TO]
UMA SHANKAR TIWARY, SON OF LATE RAMLAGAN TIWARY VS. STATE OF BIHAR [LAWS(PAT)-2019-1-69] [REFERRED TO]
SHAHID AKRAM VS. STATE OF BIHAR [LAWS(PAT)-2023-6-22] [REFERRED TO]
MD. AMZAD VS. STATE OF BIHAR [LAWS(PAT)-2024-1-87] [REFERRED TO]
JASWANT SINGH VS. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH [LAWS(SC)-2023-1-38] [REFERRED TO]
RAJO @ RAJWA @ RAJENDRA MANDAL VS. STATE OF BIHAR [LAWS(SC)-2023-8-81] [REFERRED TO]
BILKIS YAKUB RASOOL VS. UNION OF INDIA [LAWS(SC)-2024-1-23] [REFERRED TO]
MAFABHAI MOTIBHAI SAGAR VS. STATE OF GUJARAT [LAWS(SC)-2024-10-45] [REFERRED TO]
MOHD. NAUSHAD VS. STATE (GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI) [LAWS(SC)-2023-7-26] [REFERRED TO]
KAUSHAL KUMAR @ KAUSHAL KISHORE PRASAD SON OF LATE MANGAL PRASAD, RESIDENT OF QTR. NO. B VS. STATE OF JHARKHAND THROUGH CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION [LAWS(JHAR)-2016-4-221] [REFERRED TO]
RAVISHANKAR @ BABA VISHWAKARMA VS. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH [LAWS(SC)-2019-10-14] [REFERRED TO]
LAXMAN DAS VS. STATE OF BIHAR [LAWS(PAT)-2023-12-2] [REFERRED TO]
DINA GOSWAMI VS. STATE OF BIHAR [LAWS(PAT)-2023-7-33] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF KERALA VS. MUHAMMED AMEER-UL ISLAM [LAWS(KER)-2024-5-53] [REFERRED TO]
SHYAM SUNDAR JENA VS. STATE OF ORISSA [LAWS(ORI)-2020-12-20] [REFERRED TO]
RAVINDRA VS. UNION OF INDIA [LAWS(SC)-2022-2-49] [REFERRED TO]
RAM CHANDER VS. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH [LAWS(SC)-2022-4-66] [REFERRED TO]
GAURI SHANKAR VS. STATE OF PUNJAB [LAWS(SC)-2021-2-44] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH VS. JAIL SUPERINTENDENT (ROPAR) [LAWS(SC)-2021-3-72] [REFERRED TO]
GYANENDRA SINGH @ RAJA SINGH VS. STATE OF U.P. [LAWS(SC)-2025-3-29] [REFERRED TO]
VARAAKI VS. SECRETARY [LAWS(MAD)-2023-6-156] [REFERRED TO]
RAVINDER SINGH VS. STATE GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI [LAWS(SC)-2023-4-93] [REFERRED TO]
SHIV MANGAL AHIRWAR VS. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH [LAWS(SC)-2023-4-41] [REFERRED TO]
MASTER BHOLU THROUGH HIS FATHER AND NATURAL GUARDIAN VINOD KUMAR VS. CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION [LAWS(P&H)-2018-6-22] [REFERRED TO]
DULAL SHARMA VS. STATE OF TRIPURA [LAWS(TRIP)-2022-8-11] [REFERRED TO]
JOSHI MADHAVI VS. UNION OF INDIA [LAWS(TLNG)-2022-9-91] [REFERRED TO]
REGISTRAR GENERAL VS. MOHAN KUMAR [LAWS(KAR)-2017-10-243] [REFERRED TO]
SANJAY KUMAR VALMIKI VS. STATE [LAWS(DLH)-2020-7-191] [REFERRED TO]
ARUNSHARAN SINGH VS. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH [LAWS(CHH)-2022-9-104] [REFERRED TO]
BHARAT RAM VS. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH [LAWS(CHH)-2022-11-15] [REFERRED TO]
RAJU SAHU VS. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH [LAWS(CHH)-2023-5-18] [REFERRED TO]
ROHAN DHUNGAT SON OF PRADEEP R PAI DHUNGAT VS. STATE (THROUGH POLICE INSPECTOR, PANAJI POLICE STATION) [LAWS(BOM)-2019-3-7] [REFERRED TO]
RANJITH K. S/O KRISHNA MURTHY VS. STATE OF KARNATAKA [LAWS(KAR)-2019-3-58] [REFERRED TO]
VINAY MISHRA VS. CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION [LAWS(CAL)-2021-7-25] [REFERRED TO]
T.RAMESH VS. STATE OF TAMIL NADU [LAWS(MAD)-2016-8-128] [REFERRED TO]
S NALINI VS. STATE OF TAMIL NADU; ADDITIONAL DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE & INSPECTOR GENERAL OF PRISONS; SUPERINTENDENT OF PRISON, SPECIAL PRISON FOR WOMEN [LAWS(MAD)-2016-7-253] [REFERRED]
VIJAYRAJ SURANA VS. C.B.I [LAWS(KAR)-2024-4-80] [REFERRED TO]
BINOD PRASAD SON OF SRI RAMASIS PRASAD, RESIDENT OF FLAT NO. 8E SAI ASTHA APARTMENT, NEAR DAV NANDRAJ SCHOOL, BARIYATU, PO & PS BARIYATU, DISTRICT VS. STATE OF JHARKHAND THROUGH CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION [LAWS(JHAR)-2016-4-184] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH VS. BRIJ KOSHORE SONI [LAWS(MPH)-2021-2-39] [REFERRED TO]
VIKAS BHARTI AND ANOTHER VS. STATE OF M.P. AND OTERS [LAWS(MPH)-2018-1-388] [REFERRED TO]
HOME SECRETARY (PRISON-IV) VS. A. PALANISWAMY [LAWS(MAD)-2021-7-8] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF WEST BENGAL VS. NANDITA SAHA [LAWS(CAL)-2023-4-30] [REFERRED TO]
SURESH RAMCHANDRA DHANU VS. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA [LAWS(BOM)-2021-10-118] [REFERRED TO]
YOVEHEL VS. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA [LAWS(BOM)-2020-10-357] [REFERRED TO]
ROOPAN XALXO VS. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH [LAWS(CHH)-2023-11-56] [REFERRED TO]
SUKHAU RAM VS. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH [LAWS(CHH)-2023-3-60] [REFERRED TO]
RAVIRANJAN KUMAR SINGH VS. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH [LAWS(CHH)-2023-7-40] [REFERRED TO]
JOSHI MADHAVI VS. UNION OF INDIA [LAWS(TLNG)-2024-8-22] [REFERRED TO]
A RIZANA BANU VS. STATE REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT OF TAMIL NADU [LAWS(MAD)-2017-8-408] [REFERRED TO]
SUDAM @ RAHUL KANIRAM JADHAV VS. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA [LAWS(SC)-2019-10-5] [REFERRED TO]
SWAPAN KUMAR JHA @ SAPAN KUMAR VS. STATE OF JHARKHAND & ANR. [LAWS(SC)-2018-11-54] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF RAJASTHAN AND OTHERS VS. MUKESH SHARMA AND OTHERS [LAWS(SC)-2019-4-98] [REFERRED TO]
RAJAN VS. THE HOME SECRETARY, HOME DEPARTMENT OF TAMIL NADU [LAWS(SC)-2019-4-106] [REFERRED TO]
ASHWANI KUMAR VS. UNION OF INDIA [LAWS(SC)-2019-9-14] [REFERRED TO]
IRAPPA SIDDAPPA MURGANNAVAR VS. STATE OF KARNATAKA [LAWS(SC)-2021-11-1] [REFERRED TO]
NAVAS @ MULANAVAS VS. STATE OF KERALA [LAWS(SC)-2024-3-51] [REFERRED TO]
BAVUDDIN VS. STATE OF KARNATAKA [LAWS(KAR)-2020-10-49] [REFERRED TO]
RANJIT SINGH VS. STATE OF PUNJAB [LAWS(P&H)-2022-7-239] [REFERRED TO]
BINOD KUMAR MANDAL SON OF LATE RAMSURAT MANDAL, RESIDENT OF HOUSE OF RAJ KUMAR SHARMA BEHIND B/70 HARMU HOUSING COLONY, PO VS. THE STATE OF JHARKHAND THROUGH CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION [LAWS(JHAR)-2016-4-211] [REFERRED TO]
S NALINI VS. STATE OF TAMIL NADU REP BY SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT [LAWS(MAD)-2018-4-761] [REFERRED TO]
RADHAKRISHNAN VS. UNION OF INDIA [LAWS(MAD)-2019-7-179] [REFERRED TO]
SHIVA KUMAR VS. STATE OF KARNATAKA [LAWS(SC)-2023-3-119] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF HARYANA VS. ANAND KINDO [LAWS(SC)-2022-9-66] [REFERRED TO]
OMKAR SWAMY VS. STATE OF KARNATAKA [LAWS(SC)-2022-4-144] [REFERRED TO]
PAPPU VS. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH [LAWS(SC)-2022-2-35] [REFERRED TO]
SACHIN KUMAR SINGHRAHA VS. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH [LAWS(SC)-2019-3-46] [REFERRED TO]
ATAUR MRIDHA @ ATAUR VS. STATE [LAWS(BANG)-2017-2-2] [REFERRED TO]
CHANDRASI AND ANOTHER VS. STATE OF U P AND 2 OTHERS [LAWS(ALL)-2018-4-146] [REFERRED TO]
BAPU BAJARANG PATIL VS. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA [LAWS(BOM)-2023-10-67] [REFERRED TO]
ARSHAD ALI @ MUNNA KHAN VS. STATE (NCT OF DELHI) [LAWS(DLH)-2019-1-274] [REFERRED TO]
SANJAY KUMAR VALMIKI VS. STATE [LAWS(DLH)-2018-5-492] [REFERRED TO]
SIKANDER SONI VS. STATE [LAWS(DLH)-2022-9-65] [REFERRED TO]
RAM TEJ VS. STATE [LAWS(DLH)-2023-5-21] [REFERRED TO]
MADARI VS. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH [LAWS(CHH)-2022-7-110] [REFERRED TO]
MOHD. SALIM MOHD. KUDUS ANSARI VS. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA [LAWS(BOM)-2019-6-100] [REFERRED TO]
BISESHAR S/O DADU RAM NISHAD VS. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH [LAWS(CHH)-2024-1-1] [REFERRED TO]
PRANAV YADAV VS. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH [LAWS(CHH)-2023-3-67] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF KERALA VS. RASHEED [LAWS(KER)-2017-6-50] [REFERRED TO]
SURESH JOGI S/O BHERULAL JOGI VS. STATE OF M P THROUGH POLICE STATION [LAWS(MPH)-2017-6-128] [REFERRED TO]
JITHESH VS. STATE OF KERALA [LAWS(KER)-2020-8-56] [REFERRED TO]
JOSE VS. STATE OF KERALA [LAWS(KER)-2018-1-142] [REFERRED TO]
ADV THOUFEEK AHAMED VISHNU VIHAR VS. UNION OF INDIA [LAWS(KER)-2020-9-537] [REFERRED TO]
MADHABHAI PUNJABHAI VS. STATE OF GUJARAT [LAWS(GJH)-2019-9-56] [REFERRED TO]
NAPANDA S KUSHALAPPA VS. STATE BY SOMAWARPET POLICE STATION [LAWS(KAR)-2018-10-75] [REFERRED TO]
INSPECTOR OF POLICE VS. M.DHAMODARAN [LAWS(MAD)-2021-6-34] [REFERRED TO]
A.G. PERARIVALAN VS. STATE OF TAMIL NADU [LAWS(SC)-2022-5-74] [REFERRED TO]
PERARIVALAN A. G. VS. STATE, THROUGH SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE CBI [LAWS(SC)-2022-5-119] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF HARYANA VS. RAJ KUMAR [LAWS(SC)-2021-8-2] [REFERRED TO]
BECHE LAL VS. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH [LAWS(SC)-2021-5-38] [REFERRED TO]
CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION VS. SAKRU MAHAGU BINJEWAR [LAWS(SC)-2019-5-92] [REFERRED TO]
PARSURAM VS. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH [LAWS(SC)-2019-2-245] [REFERRED TO]
RAJU JAGDISH PASWAN VS. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA [LAWS(SC)-2019-1-88] [REFERRED TO]
SHAMSHER SINGH VS. UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. [LAWS(P&H)-2016-1-178] [REFERRED TO]


JUDGEMENT

- (1.)The Petitioner has challenged the letter dated 19.02.2014 issued by the Chief Secretary, Government of Tamil Nadu to the Secretary, Government of India wherein the State of Tamil Nadu proposed to remit the sentence of life imprisonment and to release the respondent Nos. 1 to 7 in the Writ Petition who were convicted in the Rajiv Gandhi assassination case. As far as respondent Nos. 1 to 3 are concerned, originally they were imposed with the sentence of death. In the judgment reported as V. Sriharan alias Murugan v. Union of India & Ors., 2014 4 SCC 242, the sentence of death was commuted by this Court. Immediately thereafter, the impugned letter came to be issued by the State of Tamil Nadu which gave rise for the filing of the present Writ Petition. While dealing with the said Writ Petition, the learned Judges thought it fit to refer seven questions for consideration by the Constitution Bench in the judgment - Union of India v. V. Sriharan @ Murugan & Ors., 2014 11 SCC 1 and that is how this Writ Petition has now been placed before us. In paragraph 52, the questions have been framed for consideration by this Bench. The said paragraph reads as under:
"52.1 Whether imprisonment for life in terms of Section 53 read with Section 45 of the Penal Code meant imprisonment for rest of the life of the prisoner or a convict undergoing life imprisonment has a right to claim remission and whether as per the principles enunciated in paras 91 to 93 of Swamy Shraddananda(2), a special category of sentence may be made for the very few cases where the death penalty might be substituted by the punishment of imprisonment for life or imprisonment for a term in excess of fourteen years and to put that category beyond application of remission?

52.2 Whether the "Appropriate Government" is permitted to exercise the power of remission under Section 432/433 of the Code after the parallel power has been exercised by the President under Article 72 or the Governor under Article 161 or by this Court in its Constitutional power under Article 32 as in this case?

52.3 Whether Section 432(7) of the Code clearly gives primacy to the Executive Power of the Union and excludes the Executive Power of the State where the power of the Union is co-extensive?

52.4 Whether the Union or the State has primacy over the subject matter enlisted in List III of the Seventh Schedule to the Constitution of India for exercise of power of remission?

52.5 Whether there can be two Appropriate Governments in a given case under Section 432(7) of the Code?

52.6 Whether suo motu exercise of power of remission under Section 432(1) is permissible in the scheme of the section, if yes, whether the procedure prescribed in subclause (2) of the same Section is mandatory or not?

52.7 Whether the term "'Consultation'" stipulated in Section 435(1) of the Code implies "'Concurrence'"?"

(2.)It was felt that the questions raised were of utmost critical concern for the whole of the country, as the decision on the questions would determine the procedure for awarding sentence in criminal justice system. When we refer to the questions as mentioned in paragraph 52 and when we heard the learned Solicitor General for the petitioner and the counsel who appeared for the State of Tamil Nadu as well as respondent Nos. 1 to 7, we find that the following issues arise for our consideration:
(a) Maintainability of this Writ Petition under Article 32 of the Constitution by the Union of India.

(b) (i) Whether imprisonment for life means for the rest of one's life with any right to claim remission?

(ii) Whether as held in Shraddananda case a special category of sentence; instead of death; for a term exceeding 14 years and put that category beyond application of remission can be imposed?

(c) Whether the Appropriate Government is permitted to grant remission under Sections 432/433 Code of Criminal Procedure after the parallel power was exercised under Article 72 by the President and under Article 161 by the Governor of the State or by the Supreme Court under its Constitutional power(s) under Article 32?

(d) Whether Union or the State has primacy for the exercise of power under Section 432(7) over the subject matter enlisted in List III of the Seventh Schedule for grant of remission?

(e) Whether there can be two Appropriate Governments under Section 432(7) of the Code?

(f) Whether the power under Section 432(1) can be exercised suo motu, if yes, whether the procedure prescribed under Section 432(2) is mandatory or not?

(g) Whether the expression "'Consultation'" stipulated in Section 435(1) of the Code implies ''Concurrence''?

(3.)On the question of maintainability of the Writ Petition by the Union of India, according to learned Solicitor General, the same cannot be permitted to be raised in this Reference since the said question was not raised and considered in the order of Reference reported as Union of India v. V. Sriharan alias Murugan & Ors. , and that when notice was issued in the Writ Petition to all the States on 09.07.2014 then also this question was not considered, that the scheme of Code of Criminal Procedure was to protect the interest of victims at the hands of accused which onerous responsibility is cast on the agency of the Central Government, namely, the CBI which took over the investigation on the very next day of the crime and, therefore, the Union of India has every locus to file the writ petition, that since the issue raised in the Writ Petition cannot be worked out by way of suit under Article 131 of the Constitution since the accused are private parties, Writ Petition is the only remedy available, that after the questions of general importance are answered, the individual cases will go before the Regular Benches and, therefore, the Union of India is only concerned about the questions of general importance and lastly if Union of India is held to be the Appropriate Government in a case of this nature, then the State will be denuded of all powers under Sections 432/433 Code of Criminal Procedure and consequently any attempted exercise will fall to the ground.


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.