Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Mukesh, a convict in the Nirbhaya gang rape case, filed a writ petition under Article 32 of the Constitution of India before the Supreme Court. The petition raised issues regarding the merits of the conviction, including alleged improper consideration of evidence, the disability of co-accused Ram Singh who allegedly committed suicide in prison, and doubts about the petitioner's arrest at Karoli, Rajasthan. The Supreme Court noted that the petitioner had been afforded sufficient opportunity and was convicted, which was upheld by the High Court on 13.03.2014. The criminal appeal before the Supreme Court was dismissed on 05.05.2017. Subsequently, the review petition was dismissed on 09.07.2018, the curative petition on 14.01.2020, and the mercy petition was rejected by the President of India on 17.01.2020. A writ petition challenging the rejection of the mercy petition was also dismissed on 29.01.2020. The petitioner then filed a criminal revision before the Patiala House Courts, which was dismissed on 17.03.2020, and a further criminal revision before the High Court was dismissed on 18.03.2020. Considering the extensive prior litigation and the submissions of the petitioner's counsel, the Supreme Court found no ground to entertain the writ petition and dismissed it, along with any pending applications.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Writ Petition under Article 32 - Maintainability - Convict sought reconsideration of conviction on grounds of improper evidence consideration, disability of co-accused, and doubts about arrest - Supreme Court held that after multiple rounds of litigation including appeal, review, curative petition, mercy petition, and criminal revisions, no ground exists to entertain the writ petition (Paras 1-3).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the writ petition under Article 32 of the Constitution of India challenging the conviction and subsequent rejections of appeals, review, curative petition, mercy petition, and criminal revisions is maintainable and has any merit.
Final Decision
The Supreme Court dismissed the writ petition under Article 32 of the Constitution of India, finding no ground to entertain it after multiple rounds of litigation. Pending applications were also disposed of.
Law Points
- Article 32 of the Constitution of India
- Criminal Procedure Code
- 1973
- Indian Penal Code
- 1860
Case Details
Writ Petition(s)(Criminal) No(s).119/2020
R. Banumathi, Ashok Bhushan, A.S. Bopanna
Mr. Manohar Lal Sharma (for petitioner)
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Writ petition under Article 32 of the Constitution of India challenging conviction and subsequent rejections of appeals, review, curative petition, mercy petition, and criminal revisions.
Remedy Sought
Petitioner sought reconsideration of conviction on grounds of improper evidence consideration, disability of co-accused, and doubts about arrest.
Filing Reason
Petitioner raised points on merits including improper consideration of evidence, disability of Ram Singh (accused no.1), and doubts about arrest at Karoli, Rajasthan.
Previous Decisions
Conviction upheld by High Court on 13.03.2014; criminal appeal dismissed by Supreme Court on 05.05.2017; review petition dismissed on 09.07.2018; curative petition dismissed on 14.01.2020; mercy petition rejected by President on 17.01.2020; writ petition against mercy rejection dismissed on 29.01.2020; criminal revision dismissed by ASJ on 17.03.2020; criminal revision dismissed by High Court on 18.03.2020.
Issues
Whether the writ petition under Article 32 is maintainable after multiple dismissals of appeals, review, curative petition, mercy petition, and criminal revisions.
Whether there is any ground to reconsider the conviction on merits.
Submissions/Arguments
Petitioner argued that there was no proper consideration of evidence, disability of co-accused Ram Singh, and doubts about arrest at Karoli, Rajasthan.
Ratio Decidendi
After exhaustive judicial scrutiny through appeals, review, curative petition, mercy petition, and criminal revisions, no further intervention under Article 32 is warranted as no new ground exists.
Judgment Excerpts
We do not find any ground to entertain this writ petition filed under Article 32 of the Constitution of India.
The writ petition is accordingly dismissed.
Procedural History
Conviction upheld by High Court on 13.03.2014; criminal appeal dismissed by Supreme Court on 05.05.2017; review petition dismissed on 09.07.2018; curative petition dismissed on 14.01.2020; mercy petition rejected by President on 17.01.2020; writ petition against mercy rejection dismissed on 29.01.2020; criminal revision dismissed by ASJ on 17.03.2020; criminal revision dismissed by High Court on 18.03.2020; present writ petition dismissed on 19.03.2020.
Acts & Sections
- Constitution of India: Article 32
