SUTHENTHIRARAJA@ SANTHAN AND ORS. ETC. ETC. versus STATE THROUGH DSP/CBI, SIT, CHENNAI ETC. ETC.

SUTHENTHIRARAJA@ SANTHAN AND ORS. ETC. ETC. versus STATE THROUGH DSP/CBI, SIT, CHENNAI ETC. ETC.

No merit shown in review petitions by convicts on question of death sentence; scope of review under Article 137 and Order XL allows for miscarriage of justice, but none found; evidence and law duly considered, and sentence distinction among convicts justified; review petitions also by State on TADA offence intent not sustained as court found no intent to strike terror.

Parties
Convict Review Petitioner: Nalini (A-1); Convict Review Petitioner: Santhan (A-2); Convict Review Petitioner: Murugan (A-3); Convict Review Petitioner: Arivu (A-18); Review Petitioner/respondent: State through DSP/CBI, SIT, Chennai
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
08 October 1999
Procedural Posture
Review Petition (criminal) / Review After Supreme Court Decision Confirming Death Sentences and Acquittals
Outcome
Review petitions dismissed by majority; one dissenting opinion to alter death sentence of Nalini to life imprisonment.
Legal Topics
Scope of Review, Death Sentence, TADA Offences, Error Apparent on Record
Criminal Law Constitutional Law Scope of Review Death Sentence TADA Offences Error Apparent on Record

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 18 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Nalini (A-1)

Convict Review Petitioner

Santhan (A-2)

Convict Review Petitioner

Murugan (A-3)

Convict Review Petitioner

Arivu (A-18)

Convict Review Petitioner

State through DSP/CBI, SIT, Chennai

Review Petitioner/respondent

Procedural Posture

Review Petition (criminal) / Review After Supreme Court Decision Confirming Death Sentences and Acquittals

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether there is ground for review of death sentence awarded to four convicts under Article 137 and Order XL of Supreme Court Rules
  2. 2 Whether guilt of convicts under TADA and IPC warrants reconsideration of sentence
  3. 3 Whether acquittal from TADA section 3(3) was erroneous

Ratio Decidendi

No merit shown in review petitions by convicts on question of death sentence; scope of review under Article 137 and Order XL allows for miscarriage of justice, but none found; evidence and law duly considered, and sentence distinction among convicts justified; review petitions also by State on TADA offence intent not sustained as court found no intent to strike terror.

Court Disposition

Review petitions dismissed by majority; one dissenting opinion to alter death sentence of Nalini to life imprisonment.

Orders

  • Death sentence of Nalini, Santhan, Murugan, and Arivu confirmed by majority.
  • No error found in acquittal from TADA section 3(3) intent to strike terror.