NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court has stayed the execution of convict Aman Singh in a death reference case and issued important directions to reform the sentencing process in capital punishment cases across the country.
A three-judge bench headed by Justice Vikram Nath, along with Justices Sandeep Mehta and Vijay Bishnoi, stayed Singh’s death sentence till the final adjudication of his appeals. The court also called for records from the trial court and the High Court, along with translated copies for effective consideration.
Earlier, the trial court in Bihar and the Patna High Court had awarded the death penalty to Singh.
While considering the mitigating and aggravating circumstances and the need for meaningful legal representation in death penalty cases, the apex court laid down several directions for trial courts, High Courts and legal services authorities.
"The report pertaining to aggravating and mitigating circumstances shall, as a matter of course, be called for by the trial Court itself once the accused is convicted, prior to the determination of sentence. In the event such a report has not been called for or placed on record before the trial Court, the High Court shall mandatorily call for the same at the stage of admission of the death reference. The concerned authorities shall ensure that such reports are comprehensive, duly verified, and furnished within a stipulated timeframe so as to avoid any delay in the adjudicatory process, and to aid and enable the Courts to undertake a meaningful, and informed, constitutionally compliant sentencing exercise. Upon receipt of such report, the Court concerned shall afford adequate opportunity to the parties to peruse the same and to advance oral submissions thereon. In cases where the reports procured by the trial Court are found to be ineffective or lacking in proper details, the High Court would be at liberty to call for a fresh report," the top court said in its 13-page order passed on April 27.
The bench further directed that in every death sentence confirmation reference before High Courts and the Supreme Court, the concerned Legal Services Committee must assign a dedicated legal team consisting of one Senior Counsel and at least two advocates with a minimum of seven years of practice to represent the convict.
Such legal representation will be provided even if the convict has engaged private counsel, to ensure full and effective assistance to the court in matters involving death penalty.
"The National Legal Services Authority shall frame and circulate appropriate guidelines identifying the relevant fields of enquiry for gathering mitigating circumstances and may engage trained teams, including legal and social science professionals, to undertake fieldwork involving interaction with the convict, their family, and relevant authorities, for the purpose of collecting detailed information regarding background, antecedents, socio-economic conditions, mental health status, and other relevant factors. Such information shall be made available to the appointed legal team, which shall, in turn, place before the Court a holistic and well-documented account of the convict's potential for reformation along with all pertinent mitigating and aggravating circumstances," the court said.
The Supreme Court also directed the State to place probation reports on record, while jail authorities were asked to submit detailed reports on the conduct, work and behaviour of the appellants in custody.
It also ordered psychological evaluation of the appellants through a government medical facility.
The court further allowed mitigation experts associated with NALSAR University of Law to conduct in-person interviews of the appellants for preparing a Mitigation Investigation Report, ensuring confidentiality and access to relevant medical and socio-economic records.
