[

death penalty

]

Latest from death penalty

Relief for second Indian-Malaysian condemned to death by Singapore

  • Datchinamurthy Kataiah, 36, was scheduled to be hanged Friday, just two days after the execution of a Malaysian man that sparked an international outcry because he was believed to be mentally disabled.
Lawyer M. Ravi, who earlier represented Datchinamurty, said the Court of Appeal allowed a stay of execution pending a legal challenge on May 20. (Getty Images/iStockphoto)
Lawyer M. Ravi, who earlier represented Datchinamurty, said the Court of Appeal allowed a stay of execution pending a legal challenge on May 20. (Getty Images/iStockphoto)
Published on Apr 28, 2022 06:02 PM IST
Copy Link
AP |

Supreme Court opens review into death penalty process

A bench, headed by justice Uday U Lalit, sought the assistance of attorney general KK Venugopal in the case registered suo motu in the wake of various issues arising out of non-enforcement of the court’s landmark ruling on death sentence cases issued more than four decades ago in the Bachan Singh case.
The court pointed out that the trial courts are at the very root of the subject matter. (AFP)
The court pointed out that the trial courts are at the very root of the subject matter. (AFP)
Updated on Mar 30, 2022 04:39 AM IST
Copy Link
By, New Delhi

SC considers key directives for trial courts and HCs in death penalty

The bench was hearing an appeal in a death sentence case from Madhya Pradesh.
The Supreme Court. (HT PHOTO)
The Supreme Court. (HT PHOTO)
Updated on Mar 23, 2022 05:02 AM IST
Copy Link

SC enforces a landmark ruling on death penalty

A bench headed by Justice Uday U Lalit has made psychological evaluation of the condemned prisoner mandatory, as well as a report on the inmate’s conduct at the time of examining whether the gallows remains the only fitting punishment.
The Supreme Court. (HT PHOTO.)
The Supreme Court. (HT PHOTO.)
Updated on Mar 02, 2022 04:46 AM IST
Copy Link
By, New Delhi

Supreme Court exonerates three given death penalty

A bench comprising justices L Nageswara Rao, BR Gavai and BV Nagarathna said that the prosecution failed to bring home the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt
The court underlined there were glaring discrepancies in the testimonies of the main witnesses of the case; recovery of weapons used in the offence was shrouded in doubts; recovery of clothes worn by the accused at the time of the offence was suspect and the motive behind the killing could not be established.(HT File)
The court underlined there were glaring discrepancies in the testimonies of the main witnesses of the case; recovery of weapons used in the offence was shrouded in doubts; recovery of clothes worn by the accused at the time of the offence was suspect and the motive behind the killing could not be established.(HT File)
Updated on Dec 16, 2021 12:47 AM IST
Copy Link
By, Hindustan Times, New Delhi
Story Saved
×
Saved Articles
Following
My Reads
Sign out
New Delhi 0C
Tuesday, May 17, 2022