Solitary confinement

Related judgements & precedents

These are some judgments that construed this section, and hold precedence value. They hold authority on how to read, interpret and use this section.

1. Shatrughan Chauhan vs Union of India

   Supreme Court of India 21 Jan 2014 Binding (Supreme Court precedent on constitutional matters; three-Judge Bench de Reportable Reported as Shatrughan Chauhan & Anr. v. Union of India & Ors., (2014) 3 SCC 1 (or similar citation in SCC 2014)

   Court's Decision & Legal Precedent

   Undue, unexplained and inordinate delay in the disposal of mercy petitions filed under Articles 72/161 of the Constitution constitutes a violation of the right to life guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution, entitling a death row convict to approach the Supreme Court under Article 32 for commutation of death sentence to life imprisonment. The procedure for executing death sentences must be just, fair and reasonable, and prolonged delay in deciding mercy petitions creates a dehumanizing effect equivalent to torture, making such execution constitutionally impermissible. While no fixed period of delay can be prescribed (overruling the two-year rule in Vatheeswaran), each case requires examination of the nature and extent of delay and all supervening circumstances (including mental illness developed on death row) in light of all the facts to determine whether execution should be carried out or commuted. The scope of limited judicial review of executive orders under Article 72/161 extends to examining whether the order was passed with application of mind, without mala fides, without extraneous considerations, with consideration of all relevant materials, and without arbitrariness. The gravity of the crime cannot preclude commutation based on delay as all death sentences are already for rarest of rare cases where gravity exhausts itself at sentencing. The distinction between TADA and IPC offences for mercy consideration is per incuriam and violates Article 14 (equality). Mental illness including schizophrenia developed by death row prisoners is a valid supervening circumstance warranting commutation. Solitary confinement of death row prisoners prior to rejection of mercy petition by President is unconstitutional.

   On this section: Applied to determine the scope of permissible confinement of death row prisoners; solitary confinement held not authorized

   Read the full order on eCourts India

The holding above is the ratio decidendi as extracted from the judgment by eCourts India, reproduced unaltered — it is a rendering of the court's reasoning, not a substitute for its words. Read the order itself before relying on it.