HC commutes death sentence of man, guilty of killing 5 persons

The Delhi High Court today commuted to life term, the capital punishment awarded to a 31- year-old man in a case relating to the murder of five persons including two children in 2004 in Chhattisgarh.
"We commute the sentence imposed upon the petitioner and substitute it to a sentence of imprisonment for life in place of death sentence awarded to petitioner," a bench of Justices G S Sistani and Vinod Goel said.
The high court made it clear that "life imprisonment means (till the) end of one's life".
The court pointed out that there were "numerous discrepancies and falsities" in the affidavits filed by the Chhattisgarh government.

"Despite the same, we have proceeded to decide the matter in the interests of justice. At the same time, such practice is deprecated and should be taken note of by the higher authorities," it added.
The High Court had on March 2, 2015 stayed the execution of Sonu Sardar after which the Chhattisgarh government had approached the Supreme Court challenging Delhi High Court's jurisdiction to hear the matter. The apex court had asked the high court to decide the state's application in this regard.

The High Court had dismissed the state government's plea and said it could hear and grant stay on the execution, as the decision rejecting his mercy plea was taken here by the President of India.

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 on November 26, 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 below and affirmed the punishment. His mercy petition was also dismissed by both the state Governor and the President of India. In February 2015, the apex court had also rejected his review plea.
The convict then moved the high court seeking quashing of the orders of the President and the Governor rejecting the mercy petition. He had also sought to commute the death sentence into life imprisonment on account of delay, improper exercise of power and illegal solitary confinement.

Allowing his appeal, the high court observed that the "supervening circumstance of solitary confinement coupled with the non-placement of relevant considerations and considering of extraneous considerations has vitiated the decision of the Governor and the President.
"Further, the incarceration of the petitioner in solitary confinement without any judicial order has run awry of the Fundamental Rights and this court, being the sentinel of the Constitution, is bound to intervene and give relief to the petitioner," it added.
The Delhi High Court in its 95-page judgement noted that the mercy petition was processed in "an extremely cavalier and casual fashion" by the state government at all stages, right up to placing the note for the Governor.

"It was all along treated as a petition seeking pre- mature release under an inapplicable rule of the Jail Manual. The Governor was informed that the petition is for pre-mature release and not commutation of sentence," it said.