In a significant judgment, the Supreme Court of India has ordered a retrial for a man from Uttar Pradesh who was on death row for the murders of his wife and daughter in 2014, highlighting severe procedural lapses and the denial of a fair trial. The bench, consisting of Justices Vikram Nath, Sanjay Karol, and Sandeep Mehta, overturned the death sentence, emphasizing the necessity of absolute certainty in cases involving capital punishment.
The accused, who had been sentenced to death by a Mainpuri trial court in March 2017 and had his sentence confirmed by the Allahabad High Court in October 2018, was represented by senior counsel and former Delhi High Court judge Rajiv Shakdher. Shakdher pointed out multiple failures in the trial process, including the absence of the defense counsel during crucial phases and the inadequate opportunity provided for the accused to present his case.
Justice Nath’s bench criticized the original handling of the case, noting the systemic disadvantages faced by those who are economically or socially vulnerable within the Indian Criminal Justice System. The judgment stressed that capital punishment should only be applied with absolute certainty of guilt, which was compromised by significant judicial oversights in this case.
The court highlighted the responsibilities of both trial and appellate courts in capital cases, underscoring the need for careful examination of all evidence and procedural correctness before confirming a death sentence. The ruling also referenced international legal standards, particularly Article 14 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, which advocates for equality before the law and the right to a fair trial.
In detailing the lapses, the Supreme Court noted that the accused’s defense was critically undermined by the frequent changes in legal aid counsel and the trial court’s failure to ensure his right to a comprehensive defense was protected. These procedural errors, according to the bench, violated the fundamental right to a fair trial under Article 21 of the Constitution, rendering the death penalty in this case untenable.
The Supreme Court has set March 18 as the date for the commencement of the retrial, which is to be conducted on a day-to-day basis to avoid further delays. The court’s directive underscores the importance of adherence to legal and procedural norms, particularly in cases where a person’s life is at stake.
