Death row convict: SC seeks Centre's response on C'garh plea

The Supreme Court today sought response from the Centre on a plea of Chhattisgarh government challenging the jurisdiction of Delhi High Court to grant stay on the execution of a man held guilty for the murder of five persons, including two children, in 2004.
A bench of Justices Dipak Misra and U U Lalit also stayed the proceedings in the case pending before the Delhi High Court and posted the matter for further hearing on October 5.
The state government has challenged the Delhi High Court order saying it had no jurisdiction to stay the execution as the offence had taken place in Chhattisgarh and even the apex court had upheld the death sentence of convict Sonu Sardar.

It has said that just because there was a delay in deciding on his mercy petition, it cannot be a ground for the matter to fall in the jurisdiction of Delhi High Court.
The state government has sought transfer of the matter from the Delhi High Court to Chhattisgarh High Court.
The Delhi High Court has on March 2, 2015, stayed the execution of Sardar convicted for the murder of five persons, including two children, in Chhattisgarh in 2004.

The convict's "black warrant" (death warrant) was scheduled to be signed on March 4, 2015.
Sardar in his plea before the Delhi High Court had contended that there was delay of two years and two months by the President in deciding on his mercy plea.

Sonu Sardar, along with his brother and accomplices, had killed five persons of a family, including a woman and two children, during a dacoity bid in Chhattisgarh's Cher village in November 2004. The trial court had slapped death penalty on him and the Chhattisgarh High Court had upheld it.
The Supreme Court in February 2012 had concurred with the findings of two courts and affirmed the punishment. In February 2015, the apex court also rejected his review plea.
Sardar, in his petition, has also sought commuting of his death sentence to life imprisonment on account of delay in deciding his mercy plea as well as for allegedly keeping him in "solitary confinement illegally".