LexGURVAIL SINGH @ GALA versus STATE OF PUNJAB
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
\ (2013) 17 S.C.R. 983 GURVAIL SINGH @ GALA v. STATE OF PUNJAB (Writ Petition (Crl.) No. D. 8788 of 2013) AUGUST 26, 2013 [DR. B.S. CHAUHAN AND S.A. BOBDE, JJ.] Sentence/Sentencing - Competence of Supreme Court A B to fix a number of years of sentence (with or without remission) when the Court commutes death sentence to life imprisonment C - Supreme Court awarded 30 years imprisonment without remission to the petitioner after commuting the death sentence to life imprisonment - Writ petition filed seeking directing to convert the sentence of 30 years without remission to a sentence of life imprisonment - Relying on the judgment D passed in Sangeet case also sought declaration that Supreme Court is not competent to fix a particular number of years (with or without remission), when it commutes death sentence to life imprisonment - Held: - The Court can fix number of years of sentence (with or without remission) - E However, the convict is deprived of the benefit of remissions only in cases where the death sentence i$ commuted to life imprisonment and it does not apply in all the cases of life imprisonment - The issue in question has been decided by Supreme Court in *Sahib Hussain case and had found that F judgment in **Sangeet case on this issue was unwarranted. Shraddananda (2) @ Murali Manohar Mishra vs. State of Karnataka (2008) 13 SCC 767: 2008 (11) SCR 93; State of U.P. vs. Sanjay Kumar (2012) 8SCC 537: 2012 (7) SCR 359; *Sahib Hussain @ *Sahib Jain vs. Sate of Rajasthan G (2013) 6 SCALE 219 - relied on. **Sangeet and Anr. vs. State of Haryana (2013) 2 SCC 452: 2012 (13) SCR 85 - held inapplicable. 983 •H 984 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2013] 17 S.C.R. A. Gurvail Singh @ Gata and Anr. vs. State of Punjab c D E (2013) 2 SCC 713: 2013 (1) SCR 783 - referred to. Case Law Reference: 2013 (1) SCR 783 referred to Para 2C 2012 (13) SCR 85 held inapplicable Para 3 2008 (11) SCR 93 relied on Para 5 2012 (7) SCR 359 retied on Para 6 (2013) 6 SCALE 219 relied on Para 9 CRIMINAL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION : Writ Petition (Crl). No. 8788 of 2013. Under Article 32 of the Constitution of India. Rishi Malhotra for the Appellant. The following Order of the Court was delivered ORDER 1. This Writ Petition is filed for direction to convert the sentence of the petitioner from 30 years in jail without remission to a sentence of life imprisonment; and further to declare that this Court is not competent to fix a particular number of years F (with or without remission) when it commutes the death sentence to life imprisonment while upholding the conviction of the accused under Section 30i of Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter referred to as 'the IPC'). G 2. Facts and circumstances giving rise to this petition are that: A. The petitioner alongwith co-accused was charged for killing 4 persons on the intervening night of 20/21.8.2000 and tried for the offences punishable under Sections 302 read with H 34 IPC. The trial court vide judgment and order dated GURVAIL SINGH @ GALA v. STATE OF PUNJAB 985 27.1.2005/5.2.2005 convicted and awarded death sentence to A him alongwith co-accused Jaj Singh. B. The High Court vide its judgment and order dated 22.9.2006 dismissed the Criminal Appeal filed by the petitioner and affirmed the death sentence reference made by the trial 8 court so far as the petitioner and the co-accused are concerned. C. Aggrieved, the petitioner challenged the said judgment and order dated 22.9.2006 by filing the criminal appeal and this Court vide judgment and order dated 7.2.2013 affirmed the conviction. However, the death sentence was converted into life C imprisonment with a direction that the petitioner shall serve 30 years in jail without remission. The aforesaid decision is reported in Gurvail Singh @ Gala & Anr. v. State of Punjab, (2013) 2 sec 713. D. Aggrieved, the petitioner preferred a review petition, which was also dismissed. Hence, the writ petition. D 3. Shri Rishi Malhotra, learned counsel appearing on E behalf of the petitioner, has submitted that this Court lacks the power to issue directions that convicts shall serve a particular minimum sentence with or without remission when death sentence is commuted to life imprisonment. Such an argument is being advanced in view of the judgment of this Court in F Sangeet & Anr. v. State of Haryana, (2013) 2 SCC 452, wherein a two Judge Bench of this Court while deal
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.