The Supreme Court on Tuesday rejected a plea to re-examine a legal question on propriety of specifying rigorous imprisonment while imposing life sentence, citing a pre-independence judgement, which has been reiterated several times by it.
A bench of Justices L Nageswara Rao and B R Gavai said in view of the authoritative pronouncements of this court on the issue, there is no need to re-examine the limited point.
The bench noted the issue was no more res integra (points of law, which have yet not been decided) as it is covered by a judgment of this court in Naib Singh Vs State of Punjab and Others (1983).
In Naib Singh case, the petitioner was originally sentenced to death for committing an offence of murder under IPC Section 302. Subsequently, the death sentence was commuted to imprisonment for life by the Punjab government. After having undergone sentence of 22 years, Naib Singh filed a writ petition under Article 32 of the Constitution challenging his continued detention.
One of the points argued by him related to sentence of imprisonment for life not to be equated to rigorous imprisonment for life.
"By taking into account the earlier judgements of this court in Pandit Kishori Lal Vs King Emperor (1945) and Gopal Vinayak Godse Vs State of Maharashtra (1961), this court in Naib Singh’s case held that the sentence of imprisonment for life has to be equated to rigorous imprisonment for life," the bench pointed out.
The court also said the law laid down in Naib Singh’s was followed in three judgements Dilpesh Balchandra Panchal Vs State of Gujarat (1992) and Sat Pal alias Sadhu Vs State of Haryana (1992) and Mohd Munna Vs Union of India (2005).
The legal point for consideration before the top court arose in a special leave petition filed by Md Alfaz Ali against life term imposed upon him for killing his wife in 2006 in district Bongaigaon in Assam on suspicion of her fidelity.
Watch latest videos by DH here:
(Published 14 September 2021, 15:00 IST)
JOIN US