The Supreme Court ruled that life imprisonment can be imposed without any remission till the last breath, in place of death sentence.
The division bench of Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul and Justice M.M. Sundresh said that it is not persuaded on the issue that the minority view in a judgment of the Court in Union of India vs. V. Sriharan should be looked into as two of the Judges opined one way in the Constitution Bench. Once the majority opines in a particular matter, that is the judgment of the Constitution Bench which says that there can be imposition of life imprisonment without any remission till the last breath as a substitution of death sentence. Therefore, it rejected that argument.
The court noted that the reference to the impugned judgment says that it has been found that the accused Ravindra was 22 years of age at the time of the judgment. When asked what is the basis for the plea that he was 17 years of age at the time of incident, counsel submitted that the same is recorded in the order passed based on a Section 313, Cr.P.C. statement but possibly no further investigation took place on this behalf as, at that time, the age of juvenility was 16 years.
The court further put a question to the counsel as to what is the material on record to show that the petitioner was about 17 years of age at the relevant time.
The counsel stated that she will have to obtain material on this behalf and thus, would need the help of the petitioner who really does not have a family and thus, made a prayer for parole for four weeks for the petitioner to make a search for the documents.
The court issued Notice limited to the aforesaid aspect returnable in four weeks.
Case title: RAVINDRA v/s UNION OF INDIA & ORS.
Citation: Writ Petition(s)(Criminal) No(s). 45/2022