Yakub Memon’s plea against the curative petition and issuance of death warrant, dismissed

Supreme Court: In the wake
of the divergent views expressed earlier by the Division Bench of A.R. Dave and
Kurian Joseph, JJ., in the petition concerning the death warrant of Yakub Memon,
the three judge bench of Dipak Misra, Amitav Roy and P.C. Pant, JJ., dismissed
the petition for lack of merits and held that there is no flaw or fault in the Curative
Petition that was decided by the three senior most judges on 21.07.2015 and the
issuance of the death warrant by the TADA Court on 30.04.2015.

The petitioner, who is one of the
accused in the 1993 Mumbai Blasts Case, was awarded death sentence for his
involvement. Appearing for the petitioner, Raju Ramachandran and Anand Grover
contended that the curative petition was not decided as per the directions
given by the Constitution Bench in Rupa Ashok Hurra v. Ashok Hurra,
(2002) 4 SCC 388, and that the requirement of sending the petition to three senior most judges and judges of
the bench who passed the judgment affecting the petition, was not complied with.
On the contrary, Attorney General Mukul Rohatgi contended that, it is the
prerogative of the Chief Justice to appoint other judges if the judges of the
judgment “complained of” are not available. He further put forth that the
decision thus taken by the Chief Justice and two senior most judges on the
curative petition would not be rendered void.  

Before dismissing the petition,
the Court shed some light upon the diverse views expressed by the Division
Bench of A.R. Dave and Kurian Joseph, JJ. As per Dave, J. the petitioner had
exhausted all the available remedies, therefore the petition did not hold any
merit. However Kurian, J. raised questions over the procedure followed by the
Court to decide the curative petition, and held that the petitioner’s right
under Article 21 of the Constitution has been violated.

The present 3- judge Bench
disagreeing with Kurian, J. observed that the procedures regarding the hearing
of a curative petition has been duly followed by this Court for the judges who
delivered the original judgment admittedly were not available in the office. The
Court further observed the remedies sought by the petitioner to seek a
commutation of his sentence, and held that ample time had been provided to the
petitioner after the rejection of his Mercy Petition by the President and that
he had exhausted every legal remedy available. The Court thus held that the
issuance of death warrant was in order and was not marred by infirmities. [Yakub Abdul Razak Memon v. State of Maharashtra, decided on 29.07.2015]  
Source: Legal news India

Leave a Reply

*