Dismissal of Review Petition under Article 32

The petitioner is a death-row convict in Nirbhaya’s case which relates to the gang rape of the victim in the moving bus in Delhi on 17 December 2012. The trial court imposed the death sentence on the petitioner and other co-accused in September 2013. The High Court vide its judgment dated 13.03.2014 confirmed the conviction of the petitioner and co-accused and also the death sentence imposed upon them. And it was noted that case falling in the “rarest of rare” category. Supreme Court confirmed the conviction and also the death sentence and dismissed the appeal preferred by the petitioner and other co-accused.
This writ petition has been filed under Article 32 of the Constitution of India by the petitioner/convict Vinay Sharma. The petitioner has filed the writ petition challenging the rejection of his mercy petition by the President of India and seeking commutation of his death sentence. Though the Supreme Court dismissed the above-said petition.

Grounds of rejection

In his petition before the Supreme Court, Vinay had contended that the rejection of his mercy plea by the President was bad in the eyes of law and is liable to be set aside since it was biased and there was non-application of mind.
That there were procedural irregularities in the consideration of the mercy petition and certain relevant documents such as his medical report, social investigation report, etc were not placed before the President.

That the factum of solitary confinement was not considered as Convict Vinay was not only kept in solitary confinement for a long time but was also tortured by the Authorities which were grounds for commutation of death sentence to life imprisonment.

Vinay also contended that he was suffering from “mental illness” and was tortured in the jail physically by the jail authorities. Therefore, the death warrant could not be executed.

That the President failed to consider that the convict was just 19 years old at the time of the commission of the offence and was not a habitual offender and hails from the lower class of society and these aspects could have been considered only thorough Social Investigation Report and no investigation was done. Thus, the death sentence should be commuted.