The arguments in favour of the appellants are as follows ġ. Whether Sec 364A as the same prescribes death or imprisonment is unconstitutional on account of the punishment being disproportionate to the gravity of the crime committed.Īrguments Arguments in favour of the Appellants.Whether the act of the appellants can be charged under Sec 364A as it was not committed against the Government, any foreign State or international inter-governmental organization.Finally this appeal was preferred in the Supreme Court against the dismissal of the Writ Petition by the HC. The Writ Petition was on that reasoning, dismissed by the HC. The HC concluded that SC has considered the nature of the offence and its gravity and held that the appellants deserved the maximum punishment prescribed for both offences proved against them. The appellant then moved to the HC praying for a mandamus striking down Sec 364 A of the IPC and for an order restraining the execution of the death sentence awarded to them. The Writ Petition was eventually withdrawn with liberty to the petitioners to approach the jurisdictional High Court for redress.
#Mjournal by vicky kumar trial#
The appellants also prayed for quashing the death sentence awarded to them by the Trial Court. The appellants then filed Writ Petition before the Supreme Court of India for a declaration that Sec 364 A IPC was ultra vires the Constitution to the extend that it prescribes death sentence for anyone found guilty. The conviction and sentence was affirmed by the High Court of Punjab and Haryana in appeal and eventually by the Supreme Court.
The appellants were tried, convicted and sentenced to death for commission of offences punishable under Sec 302 and 364 A of IPC. The Court analysed the contentions of both the parties, applying the theories of quantum of punishment and the legislative intend behind the introduction of Sec 364A and came to the conclusion that Sec 364A cannot be held to be unconstitutional and also dismissed the appeal. Against this the respondents contended that the punishment imposed is not disproportionate and that the provision also includes under its ambit the kidnapping and abduction by private individuals for money. and that the punishment imposed under Sec 364A is disproportionate to the act committed and hence the provision is liable to be stuck down as unconstitutional. The appellants contended that they cannot be charged under Sec 364A as the provision solely involves acts committed against the Government, inter governmental organization etc. Thereafter the appellants moved to the HC for declaring Sec 364A IPC unconstitutional and for restraining the sentence passed. The conviction and sentence of the appellants under Sec 302 and Sec 364A of IPC was affirmed by the HC of Punjab and Haryana and in appeal by the SC. Criminal Appellate Jurisdiction Case No.:Ĭriminal Appeal No.
0 kommentar(er)
