<p>The Supreme Court on Wednesday agreed to adjudicate a petition that urged the apex court to hear review pleas filed by all condemned convicts in an open court instead of chambers. <br /><br /></p>.<p>The plea was made by a death row convict. Under normal circumstances, judges hear review petitions in chambers in the absence of parties or lawyers.<br /><br />A bench of justices P Sathasivam and J S Khehar, while staying execution of the death sentence, also decided to hear a plea on whether the decision to award death penalty should be taken by a five-judge Bench in accordance with the Law Commission’s recommendation.<br /><br />On February 5, G Sundarrajan alias Sunder was awarded capital punishment by the apex court for killing the only male child of a couple in Tamil Nadu. <br /><br />He had killed the class-II student after kidnapping him on his way back from school on July 27, 2009, for a ransom of Rs 5 lakh. The police had recovered the body from a tank. A trial court in Cuddalore had awarded him capital punishment, a decision, which was upheld by the Madras High Court in 2010.<br /><br />The court had then noted that the convict had caused extreme miseries to the parents of the seven-year-old child, leaving them with no one to carry forward their lineage.<br /><br />In his fresh petition, Sundarrajan sought amendments in the apex court rules.<br /><br />He contended that reviews against death sentence qualified as a distinct category since life itself was at stake and the consequence of an error, which may be irreversible, was grave.<br /><br />“The recommendation in the Law Commission report that all death penalty matters in the Supreme Court be heard by a bench of five judges be implemented and, in the alternative, at the least three judges ought to hear criminal appeals where capital punishment is involved,” the petition stated.</p>
<p>The Supreme Court on Wednesday agreed to adjudicate a petition that urged the apex court to hear review pleas filed by all condemned convicts in an open court instead of chambers. <br /><br /></p>.<p>The plea was made by a death row convict. Under normal circumstances, judges hear review petitions in chambers in the absence of parties or lawyers.<br /><br />A bench of justices P Sathasivam and J S Khehar, while staying execution of the death sentence, also decided to hear a plea on whether the decision to award death penalty should be taken by a five-judge Bench in accordance with the Law Commission’s recommendation.<br /><br />On February 5, G Sundarrajan alias Sunder was awarded capital punishment by the apex court for killing the only male child of a couple in Tamil Nadu. <br /><br />He had killed the class-II student after kidnapping him on his way back from school on July 27, 2009, for a ransom of Rs 5 lakh. The police had recovered the body from a tank. A trial court in Cuddalore had awarded him capital punishment, a decision, which was upheld by the Madras High Court in 2010.<br /><br />The court had then noted that the convict had caused extreme miseries to the parents of the seven-year-old child, leaving them with no one to carry forward their lineage.<br /><br />In his fresh petition, Sundarrajan sought amendments in the apex court rules.<br /><br />He contended that reviews against death sentence qualified as a distinct category since life itself was at stake and the consequence of an error, which may be irreversible, was grave.<br /><br />“The recommendation in the Law Commission report that all death penalty matters in the Supreme Court be heard by a bench of five judges be implemented and, in the alternative, at the least three judges ought to hear criminal appeals where capital punishment is involved,” the petition stated.</p>
