Deprecated (16384): The ArrayAccess methods will be removed in 4.0.0.Use getParam(), getData() and getQuery() instead. - /home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php, line: 73 You can disable deprecation warnings by setting `Error.errorLevel` to `E_ALL & ~E_USER_DEPRECATED` in your config/app.php. [CORE/src/Core/functions.php, line 311]Code Context
trigger_error($message, E_USER_DEPRECATED);
}
$message = 'The ArrayAccess methods will be removed in 4.0.0.Use getParam(), getData() and getQuery() instead. - /home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php, line: 73 You can disable deprecation warnings by setting `Error.errorLevel` to `E_ALL & ~E_USER_DEPRECATED` in your config/app.php.' $stackFrame = (int) 1 $trace = [ (int) 0 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/ServerRequest.php', 'line' => (int) 2421, 'function' => 'deprecationWarning', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => 'The ArrayAccess methods will be removed in 4.0.0.Use getParam(), getData() and getQuery() instead.' ] ], (int) 1 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php', 'line' => (int) 73, 'function' => 'offsetGet', 'class' => 'Cake\Http\ServerRequest', 'object' => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => 'catslug' ] ], (int) 2 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Controller/Controller.php', 'line' => (int) 610, 'function' => 'printArticle', 'class' => 'App\Controller\ArtileDetailController', 'object' => object(App\Controller\ArtileDetailController) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [] ], (int) 3 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php', 'line' => (int) 120, 'function' => 'invokeAction', 'class' => 'Cake\Controller\Controller', 'object' => object(App\Controller\ArtileDetailController) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [] ], (int) 4 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php', 'line' => (int) 94, 'function' => '_invoke', 'class' => 'Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher', 'object' => object(Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => object(App\Controller\ArtileDetailController) {} ] ], (int) 5 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/BaseApplication.php', 'line' => (int) 235, 'function' => 'dispatch', 'class' => 'Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher', 'object' => object(Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {}, (int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {} ] ], (int) 6 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Runner.php', 'line' => (int) 65, 'function' => '__invoke', 'class' => 'Cake\Http\BaseApplication', 'object' => object(App\Application) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {}, (int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {}, (int) 2 => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {} ] ], (int) 7 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Routing/Middleware/RoutingMiddleware.php', 'line' => (int) 162, 'function' => '__invoke', 'class' => 'Cake\Http\Runner', 'object' => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {}, (int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {} ] ], (int) 8 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Runner.php', 'line' => (int) 65, 'function' => '__invoke', 'class' => 'Cake\Routing\Middleware\RoutingMiddleware', 'object' => object(Cake\Routing\Middleware\RoutingMiddleware) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {}, (int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {}, (int) 2 => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {} ] ], (int) 9 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Routing/Middleware/AssetMiddleware.php', 'line' => (int) 88, 'function' => '__invoke', 'class' => 'Cake\Http\Runner', 'object' => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {}, (int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {} ] ], (int) 10 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Runner.php', 'line' => (int) 65, 'function' => '__invoke', 'class' => 'Cake\Routing\Middleware\AssetMiddleware', 'object' => object(Cake\Routing\Middleware\AssetMiddleware) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {}, (int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {}, (int) 2 => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {} ] ], (int) 11 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Error/Middleware/ErrorHandlerMiddleware.php', 'line' => (int) 96, 'function' => '__invoke', 'class' => 'Cake\Http\Runner', 'object' => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {}, (int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {} ] ], (int) 12 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Runner.php', 'line' => (int) 65, 'function' => '__invoke', 'class' => 'Cake\Error\Middleware\ErrorHandlerMiddleware', 'object' => object(Cake\Error\Middleware\ErrorHandlerMiddleware) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {}, (int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {}, (int) 2 => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {} ] ], (int) 13 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Runner.php', 'line' => (int) 51, 'function' => '__invoke', 'class' => 'Cake\Http\Runner', 'object' => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {}, (int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {} ] ], (int) 14 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Server.php', 'line' => (int) 98, 'function' => 'run', 'class' => 'Cake\Http\Runner', 'object' => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\MiddlewareQueue) {}, (int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {}, (int) 2 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {} ] ], (int) 15 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/webroot/index.php', 'line' => (int) 39, 'function' => 'run', 'class' => 'Cake\Http\Server', 'object' => object(Cake\Http\Server) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [] ] ] $frame = [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php', 'line' => (int) 73, 'function' => 'offsetGet', 'class' => 'Cake\Http\ServerRequest', 'object' => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) { trustProxy => false [protected] params => [ [maximum depth reached] ] [protected] data => [[maximum depth reached]] [protected] query => [[maximum depth reached]] [protected] cookies => [ [maximum depth reached] ] [protected] _environment => [ [maximum depth reached] ] [protected] url => 'latest-news-updates/there-is-case-for-commuting-bhullar-sentence-mb-shah-darshan-desai-and-v-venkatesan-20569/print' [protected] base => '' [protected] webroot => '/' [protected] here => '/latest-news-updates/there-is-case-for-commuting-bhullar-sentence-mb-shah-darshan-desai-and-v-venkatesan-20569/print' [protected] trustedProxies => [[maximum depth reached]] [protected] _input => null [protected] _detectors => [ [maximum depth reached] ] [protected] _detectorCache => [ [maximum depth reached] ] [protected] stream => object(Zend\Diactoros\PhpInputStream) {} [protected] uri => object(Zend\Diactoros\Uri) {} [protected] session => object(Cake\Http\Session) {} [protected] attributes => [[maximum depth reached]] [protected] emulatedAttributes => [ [maximum depth reached] ] [protected] uploadedFiles => [[maximum depth reached]] [protected] protocol => null [protected] requestTarget => null [private] deprecatedProperties => [ [maximum depth reached] ] }, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => 'catslug' ] ]deprecationWarning - CORE/src/Core/functions.php, line 311 Cake\Http\ServerRequest::offsetGet() - CORE/src/Http/ServerRequest.php, line 2421 App\Controller\ArtileDetailController::printArticle() - APP/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php, line 73 Cake\Controller\Controller::invokeAction() - CORE/src/Controller/Controller.php, line 610 Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::_invoke() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 120 Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::dispatch() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 94 Cake\Http\BaseApplication::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/BaseApplication.php, line 235 Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65 Cake\Routing\Middleware\RoutingMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/RoutingMiddleware.php, line 162 Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65 Cake\Routing\Middleware\AssetMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/AssetMiddleware.php, line 88 Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65 Cake\Error\Middleware\ErrorHandlerMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Error/Middleware/ErrorHandlerMiddleware.php, line 96 Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65 Cake\Http\Runner::run() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 51 Cake\Http\Server::run() - CORE/src/Http/Server.php, line 98
Deprecated (16384): The ArrayAccess methods will be removed in 4.0.0.Use getParam(), getData() and getQuery() instead. - /home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php, line: 74 You can disable deprecation warnings by setting `Error.errorLevel` to `E_ALL & ~E_USER_DEPRECATED` in your config/app.php. [CORE/src/Core/functions.php, line 311]Code Context
trigger_error($message, E_USER_DEPRECATED);
}
$message = 'The ArrayAccess methods will be removed in 4.0.0.Use getParam(), getData() and getQuery() instead. - /home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php, line: 74 You can disable deprecation warnings by setting `Error.errorLevel` to `E_ALL & ~E_USER_DEPRECATED` in your config/app.php.' $stackFrame = (int) 1 $trace = [ (int) 0 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/ServerRequest.php', 'line' => (int) 2421, 'function' => 'deprecationWarning', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => 'The ArrayAccess methods will be removed in 4.0.0.Use getParam(), getData() and getQuery() instead.' ] ], (int) 1 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php', 'line' => (int) 74, 'function' => 'offsetGet', 'class' => 'Cake\Http\ServerRequest', 'object' => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => 'artileslug' ] ], (int) 2 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Controller/Controller.php', 'line' => (int) 610, 'function' => 'printArticle', 'class' => 'App\Controller\ArtileDetailController', 'object' => object(App\Controller\ArtileDetailController) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [] ], (int) 3 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php', 'line' => (int) 120, 'function' => 'invokeAction', 'class' => 'Cake\Controller\Controller', 'object' => object(App\Controller\ArtileDetailController) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [] ], (int) 4 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php', 'line' => (int) 94, 'function' => '_invoke', 'class' => 'Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher', 'object' => object(Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => object(App\Controller\ArtileDetailController) {} ] ], (int) 5 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/BaseApplication.php', 'line' => (int) 235, 'function' => 'dispatch', 'class' => 'Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher', 'object' => object(Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {}, (int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {} ] ], (int) 6 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Runner.php', 'line' => (int) 65, 'function' => '__invoke', 'class' => 'Cake\Http\BaseApplication', 'object' => object(App\Application) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {}, (int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {}, (int) 2 => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {} ] ], (int) 7 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Routing/Middleware/RoutingMiddleware.php', 'line' => (int) 162, 'function' => '__invoke', 'class' => 'Cake\Http\Runner', 'object' => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {}, (int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {} ] ], (int) 8 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Runner.php', 'line' => (int) 65, 'function' => '__invoke', 'class' => 'Cake\Routing\Middleware\RoutingMiddleware', 'object' => object(Cake\Routing\Middleware\RoutingMiddleware) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {}, (int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {}, (int) 2 => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {} ] ], (int) 9 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Routing/Middleware/AssetMiddleware.php', 'line' => (int) 88, 'function' => '__invoke', 'class' => 'Cake\Http\Runner', 'object' => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {}, (int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {} ] ], (int) 10 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Runner.php', 'line' => (int) 65, 'function' => '__invoke', 'class' => 'Cake\Routing\Middleware\AssetMiddleware', 'object' => object(Cake\Routing\Middleware\AssetMiddleware) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {}, (int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {}, (int) 2 => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {} ] ], (int) 11 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Error/Middleware/ErrorHandlerMiddleware.php', 'line' => (int) 96, 'function' => '__invoke', 'class' => 'Cake\Http\Runner', 'object' => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {}, (int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {} ] ], (int) 12 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Runner.php', 'line' => (int) 65, 'function' => '__invoke', 'class' => 'Cake\Error\Middleware\ErrorHandlerMiddleware', 'object' => object(Cake\Error\Middleware\ErrorHandlerMiddleware) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {}, (int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {}, (int) 2 => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {} ] ], (int) 13 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Runner.php', 'line' => (int) 51, 'function' => '__invoke', 'class' => 'Cake\Http\Runner', 'object' => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {}, (int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {} ] ], (int) 14 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Server.php', 'line' => (int) 98, 'function' => 'run', 'class' => 'Cake\Http\Runner', 'object' => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\MiddlewareQueue) {}, (int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {}, (int) 2 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {} ] ], (int) 15 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/webroot/index.php', 'line' => (int) 39, 'function' => 'run', 'class' => 'Cake\Http\Server', 'object' => object(Cake\Http\Server) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [] ] ] $frame = [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php', 'line' => (int) 74, 'function' => 'offsetGet', 'class' => 'Cake\Http\ServerRequest', 'object' => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) { trustProxy => false [protected] params => [ [maximum depth reached] ] [protected] data => [[maximum depth reached]] [protected] query => [[maximum depth reached]] [protected] cookies => [ [maximum depth reached] ] [protected] _environment => [ [maximum depth reached] ] [protected] url => 'latest-news-updates/there-is-case-for-commuting-bhullar-sentence-mb-shah-darshan-desai-and-v-venkatesan-20569/print' [protected] base => '' [protected] webroot => '/' [protected] here => '/latest-news-updates/there-is-case-for-commuting-bhullar-sentence-mb-shah-darshan-desai-and-v-venkatesan-20569/print' [protected] trustedProxies => [[maximum depth reached]] [protected] _input => null [protected] _detectors => [ [maximum depth reached] ] [protected] _detectorCache => [ [maximum depth reached] ] [protected] stream => object(Zend\Diactoros\PhpInputStream) {} [protected] uri => object(Zend\Diactoros\Uri) {} [protected] session => object(Cake\Http\Session) {} [protected] attributes => [[maximum depth reached]] [protected] emulatedAttributes => [ [maximum depth reached] ] [protected] uploadedFiles => [[maximum depth reached]] [protected] protocol => null [protected] requestTarget => null [private] deprecatedProperties => [ [maximum depth reached] ] }, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => 'artileslug' ] ]deprecationWarning - CORE/src/Core/functions.php, line 311 Cake\Http\ServerRequest::offsetGet() - CORE/src/Http/ServerRequest.php, line 2421 App\Controller\ArtileDetailController::printArticle() - APP/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php, line 74 Cake\Controller\Controller::invokeAction() - CORE/src/Controller/Controller.php, line 610 Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::_invoke() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 120 Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::dispatch() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 94 Cake\Http\BaseApplication::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/BaseApplication.php, line 235 Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65 Cake\Routing\Middleware\RoutingMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/RoutingMiddleware.php, line 162 Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65 Cake\Routing\Middleware\AssetMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/AssetMiddleware.php, line 88 Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65 Cake\Error\Middleware\ErrorHandlerMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Error/Middleware/ErrorHandlerMiddleware.php, line 96 Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65 Cake\Http\Runner::run() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 51 Cake\Http\Server::run() - CORE/src/Http/Server.php, line 98
Warning (512): Unable to emit headers. Headers sent in file=/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Error/Debugger.php line=853 [CORE/src/Http/ResponseEmitter.php, line 48]Code Contextif (Configure::read('debug')) {
trigger_error($message, E_USER_WARNING);
} else {
$response = object(Cake\Http\Response) { 'status' => (int) 200, 'contentType' => 'text/html', 'headers' => [ 'Content-Type' => [ [maximum depth reached] ] ], 'file' => null, 'fileRange' => [], 'cookies' => object(Cake\Http\Cookie\CookieCollection) {}, 'cacheDirectives' => [], 'body' => '<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Transitional//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-transitional.dtd"> <html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"> <head> <link rel="canonical" href="https://im4change.in/<pre class="cake-error"><a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="document.getElementById('cakeErr67f45d0e45667-trace').style.display = (document.getElementById('cakeErr67f45d0e45667-trace').style.display == 'none' ? '' : 'none');"><b>Notice</b> (8)</a>: Undefined variable: urlPrefix [<b>APP/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp</b>, line <b>8</b>]<div id="cakeErr67f45d0e45667-trace" class="cake-stack-trace" style="display: none;"><a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="document.getElementById('cakeErr67f45d0e45667-code').style.display = (document.getElementById('cakeErr67f45d0e45667-code').style.display == 'none' ? '' : 'none')">Code</a> <a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="document.getElementById('cakeErr67f45d0e45667-context').style.display = (document.getElementById('cakeErr67f45d0e45667-context').style.display == 'none' ? '' : 'none')">Context</a><pre id="cakeErr67f45d0e45667-code" class="cake-code-dump" style="display: none;"><code><span style="color: #000000"><span style="color: #0000BB"></span><span style="color: #007700"><</span><span style="color: #0000BB">head</span><span style="color: #007700">> </span></span></code> <span class="code-highlight"><code><span style="color: #000000"> <link rel="canonical" href="<span style="color: #0000BB"><?php </span><span style="color: #007700">echo </span><span style="color: #0000BB">Configure</span><span style="color: #007700">::</span><span style="color: #0000BB">read</span><span style="color: #007700">(</span><span style="color: #DD0000">'SITE_URL'</span><span style="color: #007700">); </span><span style="color: #0000BB">?><?php </span><span style="color: #007700">echo </span><span style="color: #0000BB">$urlPrefix</span><span style="color: #007700">;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">?><?php </span><span style="color: #007700">echo </span><span style="color: #0000BB">$article_current</span><span style="color: #007700">-></span><span style="color: #0000BB">category</span><span style="color: #007700">-></span><span style="color: #0000BB">slug</span><span style="color: #007700">; </span><span style="color: #0000BB">?></span>/<span style="color: #0000BB"><?php </span><span style="color: #007700">echo </span><span style="color: #0000BB">$article_current</span><span style="color: #007700">-></span><span style="color: #0000BB">seo_url</span><span style="color: #007700">; </span><span style="color: #0000BB">?></span>.html"/> </span></code></span> <code><span style="color: #000000"><span style="color: #0000BB"> </span><span style="color: #007700"><</span><span style="color: #0000BB">meta http</span><span style="color: #007700">-</span><span style="color: #0000BB">equiv</span><span style="color: #007700">=</span><span style="color: #DD0000">"Content-Type" </span><span style="color: #0000BB">content</span><span style="color: #007700">=</span><span style="color: #DD0000">"text/html; charset=utf-8"</span><span style="color: #007700">/> </span></span></code></pre><pre id="cakeErr67f45d0e45667-context" class="cake-context" style="display: none;">$viewFile = '/home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp' $dataForView = [ 'article_current' => object(App\Model\Entity\Article) { 'id' => (int) 20427, 'title' => 'There is case for commuting Bhullar sentence: MB Shah-Darshan Desai and V Venkatesan', 'subheading' => '', 'description' => '<div align="justify"> -The Hindu </div> <p align="justify"> <br /> Death-row convict, Devender Pal Singh Bhullar, whose writ petition against the rejection of his mercy petition on the ground of inordinate and unexplained delay was dismissed by the Supreme Court on April 12, perhaps, has reason for hope with a former Judge of the Supreme Court, Justice M.B. Shah, reiterating his case for commuting his death sentence. </p> <p align="justify"> Justice Shah was the dissenting Judge who found Bhullar innocent, while two other Judges on the Supreme Court Bench found him guilty while dismissing in 2002 his appeal against TADA Court's death sentence in the 1993 blasts case in New Delhi in which nine persons were killed and 17 injured. Justice Shah - again dissenting from his two colleagues on the Bench - partly accepted Bhullar's review petition in 2002, by directing commutation of his death sentence to life imprisonment, in view of his dissent, which did not make it a &lsquo;rarest of rare case'. </p> <p align="justify"> Justice Shah, who now lives in Ahmedabad, told The Hindu on Saturday that &quot;the normal procedure in death penalty cases is that when there is a dissenting judgment, it gets converted into life sentence.&quot; </p> <p align="justify"> &quot;I don't know why this was not followed in this case,&quot; he said, when asked further about the majority Judges' suggestion (in their separate judgment in 2002) that the Government could consider Justice Shah's dissent in the context of Section 432(2) of Code of Criminal Procedure (Cr.P.C.). </p> <p align="justify"> This provision states that whenever an application is made to the appropriate Government for the suspension or remission of a sentence, the Government may require the presiding Judge of the Court which confirmed the sentence, to state his opinion as whether the application should be granted or refused, together with his reasons for such opinion. </p> <p align="justify"> Although this requirement is an option before the Government, the majority Judges suggested this as a way out of the possible dilemma before the Government in view of Justice Shah's dissent. It clearly implied that the majority Judges too would have wanted Bhullar's sentence finally commuted by the Government using the option provided by Section 432(2) Cr.P.C. Justice Shah was the Presiding Judge of the Bench which dismissed Bhullar's appeal in 2002. The other two Judges were Justice Arijit Pasayat and Justice B.N.Agrawal. </p> <p align="justify"> When asked if according to Section 432(2) of Criminal Procedure Code, his opinion ought to have been taken while deciding on the mercy petition, Justice Shah replied: &quot;There are laid procedures and I don't wish to comment if I should or must have been consulted. And then, I had already retired by then,&quot; he said. </p> <p align="justify"> Bhullar submitted his mercy petition to the President on January 14, 2003. Justice Shah retired from the Supreme Court on September 24, 2003. The Ministry of Home Affairs sent its first recommendation to reject Bhullar's mercy petition to the then President, Abdul Kalam on July 11, 2005. It was left to his successor, Ms.Pratibha Patil to finally reject his mercy petition on the basis of a fresh recommendation from the MHA in 2011. </p> <p align="justify"> The chronology clearly establishes that had the then NDA Government wanted, it could have obtained Justice Shah's opinion and reasoning under Section 432(2) of Cr.P.C., as suggested by the majority Judges in their opinion, before Justice Shah retired in 2003. </p> <p align="justify"> Justice Shah's reference to normal procedure in such cases - where the appropriate Government fails to follow the procedure laid down by Section 432(2) of Cr.P.C. and as suggested by the Supreme Court itself - thus assumes significance. </p> <p align="justify"> &nbsp; </p>', 'credit_writer' => 'The Hindu, 21 April, 2013, http://www.thehindu.com/todays-paper/tp-national/there-is-case-for-commuting-bhullar-sentence-mb-shah/article4638737.ece', 'article_img' => '', 'article_img_thumb' => '', 'status' => (int) 1, 'show_on_home' => (int) 1, 'lang' => 'EN', 'category_id' => (int) 16, 'tag_keyword' => '', 'seo_url' => 'there-is-case-for-commuting-bhullar-sentence-mb-shah-darshan-desai-and-v-venkatesan-20569', 'meta_title' => null, 'meta_keywords' => null, 'meta_description' => null, 'noindex' => (int) 0, 'publish_date' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenDate) {}, 'most_visit_section_id' => null, 'article_big_img' => null, 'liveid' => (int) 20569, 'created' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {}, 'modified' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {}, 'edate' => '', 'tags' => [ [maximum depth reached] ], 'category' => object(App\Model\Entity\Category) {}, '[new]' => false, '[accessible]' => [ [maximum depth reached] ], '[dirty]' => [[maximum depth reached]], '[original]' => [[maximum depth reached]], '[virtual]' => [[maximum depth reached]], '[hasErrors]' => false, '[errors]' => [[maximum depth reached]], '[invalid]' => [[maximum depth reached]], '[repository]' => 'Articles' }, 'articleid' => (int) 20427, 'metaTitle' => 'LATEST NEWS UPDATES | There is case for commuting Bhullar sentence: MB Shah-Darshan Desai and V Venkatesan', 'metaKeywords' => 'crime,Law and Justice', 'metaDesc' => ' -The Hindu Death-row convict, Devender Pal Singh Bhullar, whose writ petition against the rejection of his mercy petition on the ground of inordinate and unexplained delay was dismissed by the Supreme Court on April 12, perhaps, has reason for hope...', 'disp' => '<div align="justify">-The Hindu</div><p align="justify"><br />Death-row convict, Devender Pal Singh Bhullar, whose writ petition against the rejection of his mercy petition on the ground of inordinate and unexplained delay was dismissed by the Supreme Court on April 12, perhaps, has reason for hope with a former Judge of the Supreme Court, Justice M.B. Shah, reiterating his case for commuting his death sentence.</p><p align="justify">Justice Shah was the dissenting Judge who found Bhullar innocent, while two other Judges on the Supreme Court Bench found him guilty while dismissing in 2002 his appeal against TADA Court's death sentence in the 1993 blasts case in New Delhi in which nine persons were killed and 17 injured. Justice Shah - again dissenting from his two colleagues on the Bench - partly accepted Bhullar's review petition in 2002, by directing commutation of his death sentence to life imprisonment, in view of his dissent, which did not make it a &lsquo;rarest of rare case'.</p><p align="justify">Justice Shah, who now lives in Ahmedabad, told The Hindu on Saturday that &quot;the normal procedure in death penalty cases is that when there is a dissenting judgment, it gets converted into life sentence.&quot;</p><p align="justify"> &quot;I don't know why this was not followed in this case,&quot; he said, when asked further about the majority Judges' suggestion (in their separate judgment in 2002) that the Government could consider Justice Shah's dissent in the context of Section 432(2) of Code of Criminal Procedure (Cr.P.C.).</p><p align="justify">This provision states that whenever an application is made to the appropriate Government for the suspension or remission of a sentence, the Government may require the presiding Judge of the Court which confirmed the sentence, to state his opinion as whether the application should be granted or refused, together with his reasons for such opinion.</p><p align="justify">Although this requirement is an option before the Government, the majority Judges suggested this as a way out of the possible dilemma before the Government in view of Justice Shah's dissent. It clearly implied that the majority Judges too would have wanted Bhullar's sentence finally commuted by the Government using the option provided by Section 432(2) Cr.P.C. Justice Shah was the Presiding Judge of the Bench which dismissed Bhullar's appeal in 2002. The other two Judges were Justice Arijit Pasayat and Justice B.N.Agrawal.</p><p align="justify">When asked if according to Section 432(2) of Criminal Procedure Code, his opinion ought to have been taken while deciding on the mercy petition, Justice Shah replied: &quot;There are laid procedures and I don't wish to comment if I should or must have been consulted. And then, I had already retired by then,&quot; he said. </p><p align="justify">Bhullar submitted his mercy petition to the President on January 14, 2003. Justice Shah retired from the Supreme Court on September 24, 2003. The Ministry of Home Affairs sent its first recommendation to reject Bhullar's mercy petition to the then President, Abdul Kalam on July 11, 2005. It was left to his successor, Ms.Pratibha Patil to finally reject his mercy petition on the basis of a fresh recommendation from the MHA in 2011.</p><p align="justify">The chronology clearly establishes that had the then NDA Government wanted, it could have obtained Justice Shah's opinion and reasoning under Section 432(2) of Cr.P.C., as suggested by the majority Judges in their opinion, before Justice Shah retired in 2003.</p><p align="justify">Justice Shah's reference to normal procedure in such cases - where the appropriate Government fails to follow the procedure laid down by Section 432(2) of Cr.P.C. and as suggested by the Supreme Court itself - thus assumes significance. </p><p align="justify">&nbsp;</p>', 'lang' => 'English', 'SITE_URL' => 'https://im4change.in/', 'site_title' => 'im4change', 'adminprix' => 'admin' ] $article_current = object(App\Model\Entity\Article) { 'id' => (int) 20427, 'title' => 'There is case for commuting Bhullar sentence: MB Shah-Darshan Desai and V Venkatesan', 'subheading' => '', 'description' => '<div align="justify"> -The Hindu </div> <p align="justify"> <br /> Death-row convict, Devender Pal Singh Bhullar, whose writ petition against the rejection of his mercy petition on the ground of inordinate and unexplained delay was dismissed by the Supreme Court on April 12, perhaps, has reason for hope with a former Judge of the Supreme Court, Justice M.B. Shah, reiterating his case for commuting his death sentence. </p> <p align="justify"> Justice Shah was the dissenting Judge who found Bhullar innocent, while two other Judges on the Supreme Court Bench found him guilty while dismissing in 2002 his appeal against TADA Court's death sentence in the 1993 blasts case in New Delhi in which nine persons were killed and 17 injured. Justice Shah - again dissenting from his two colleagues on the Bench - partly accepted Bhullar's review petition in 2002, by directing commutation of his death sentence to life imprisonment, in view of his dissent, which did not make it a &lsquo;rarest of rare case'. </p> <p align="justify"> Justice Shah, who now lives in Ahmedabad, told The Hindu on Saturday that &quot;the normal procedure in death penalty cases is that when there is a dissenting judgment, it gets converted into life sentence.&quot; </p> <p align="justify"> &quot;I don't know why this was not followed in this case,&quot; he said, when asked further about the majority Judges' suggestion (in their separate judgment in 2002) that the Government could consider Justice Shah's dissent in the context of Section 432(2) of Code of Criminal Procedure (Cr.P.C.). </p> <p align="justify"> This provision states that whenever an application is made to the appropriate Government for the suspension or remission of a sentence, the Government may require the presiding Judge of the Court which confirmed the sentence, to state his opinion as whether the application should be granted or refused, together with his reasons for such opinion. </p> <p align="justify"> Although this requirement is an option before the Government, the majority Judges suggested this as a way out of the possible dilemma before the Government in view of Justice Shah's dissent. It clearly implied that the majority Judges too would have wanted Bhullar's sentence finally commuted by the Government using the option provided by Section 432(2) Cr.P.C. Justice Shah was the Presiding Judge of the Bench which dismissed Bhullar's appeal in 2002. The other two Judges were Justice Arijit Pasayat and Justice B.N.Agrawal. </p> <p align="justify"> When asked if according to Section 432(2) of Criminal Procedure Code, his opinion ought to have been taken while deciding on the mercy petition, Justice Shah replied: &quot;There are laid procedures and I don't wish to comment if I should or must have been consulted. And then, I had already retired by then,&quot; he said. </p> <p align="justify"> Bhullar submitted his mercy petition to the President on January 14, 2003. Justice Shah retired from the Supreme Court on September 24, 2003. The Ministry of Home Affairs sent its first recommendation to reject Bhullar's mercy petition to the then President, Abdul Kalam on July 11, 2005. It was left to his successor, Ms.Pratibha Patil to finally reject his mercy petition on the basis of a fresh recommendation from the MHA in 2011. </p> <p align="justify"> The chronology clearly establishes that had the then NDA Government wanted, it could have obtained Justice Shah's opinion and reasoning under Section 432(2) of Cr.P.C., as suggested by the majority Judges in their opinion, before Justice Shah retired in 2003. </p> <p align="justify"> Justice Shah's reference to normal procedure in such cases - where the appropriate Government fails to follow the procedure laid down by Section 432(2) of Cr.P.C. and as suggested by the Supreme Court itself - thus assumes significance. </p> <p align="justify"> &nbsp; </p>', 'credit_writer' => 'The Hindu, 21 April, 2013, http://www.thehindu.com/todays-paper/tp-national/there-is-case-for-commuting-bhullar-sentence-mb-shah/article4638737.ece', 'article_img' => '', 'article_img_thumb' => '', 'status' => (int) 1, 'show_on_home' => (int) 1, 'lang' => 'EN', 'category_id' => (int) 16, 'tag_keyword' => '', 'seo_url' => 'there-is-case-for-commuting-bhullar-sentence-mb-shah-darshan-desai-and-v-venkatesan-20569', 'meta_title' => null, 'meta_keywords' => null, 'meta_description' => null, 'noindex' => (int) 0, 'publish_date' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenDate) {}, 'most_visit_section_id' => null, 'article_big_img' => null, 'liveid' => (int) 20569, 'created' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {}, 'modified' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {}, 'edate' => '', 'tags' => [ (int) 0 => object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {}, (int) 1 => object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {} ], 'category' => object(App\Model\Entity\Category) {}, '[new]' => false, '[accessible]' => [ '*' => true, 'id' => false ], '[dirty]' => [], '[original]' => [], '[virtual]' => [], '[hasErrors]' => false, '[errors]' => [], '[invalid]' => [], '[repository]' => 'Articles' } $articleid = (int) 20427 $metaTitle = 'LATEST NEWS UPDATES | There is case for commuting Bhullar sentence: MB Shah-Darshan Desai and V Venkatesan' $metaKeywords = 'crime,Law and Justice' $metaDesc = ' -The Hindu Death-row convict, Devender Pal Singh Bhullar, whose writ petition against the rejection of his mercy petition on the ground of inordinate and unexplained delay was dismissed by the Supreme Court on April 12, perhaps, has reason for hope...' $disp = '<div align="justify">-The Hindu</div><p align="justify"><br />Death-row convict, Devender Pal Singh Bhullar, whose writ petition against the rejection of his mercy petition on the ground of inordinate and unexplained delay was dismissed by the Supreme Court on April 12, perhaps, has reason for hope with a former Judge of the Supreme Court, Justice M.B. Shah, reiterating his case for commuting his death sentence.</p><p align="justify">Justice Shah was the dissenting Judge who found Bhullar innocent, while two other Judges on the Supreme Court Bench found him guilty while dismissing in 2002 his appeal against TADA Court's death sentence in the 1993 blasts case in New Delhi in which nine persons were killed and 17 injured. Justice Shah - again dissenting from his two colleagues on the Bench - partly accepted Bhullar's review petition in 2002, by directing commutation of his death sentence to life imprisonment, in view of his dissent, which did not make it a &lsquo;rarest of rare case'.</p><p align="justify">Justice Shah, who now lives in Ahmedabad, told The Hindu on Saturday that &quot;the normal procedure in death penalty cases is that when there is a dissenting judgment, it gets converted into life sentence.&quot;</p><p align="justify"> &quot;I don't know why this was not followed in this case,&quot; he said, when asked further about the majority Judges' suggestion (in their separate judgment in 2002) that the Government could consider Justice Shah's dissent in the context of Section 432(2) of Code of Criminal Procedure (Cr.P.C.).</p><p align="justify">This provision states that whenever an application is made to the appropriate Government for the suspension or remission of a sentence, the Government may require the presiding Judge of the Court which confirmed the sentence, to state his opinion as whether the application should be granted or refused, together with his reasons for such opinion.</p><p align="justify">Although this requirement is an option before the Government, the majority Judges suggested this as a way out of the possible dilemma before the Government in view of Justice Shah's dissent. It clearly implied that the majority Judges too would have wanted Bhullar's sentence finally commuted by the Government using the option provided by Section 432(2) Cr.P.C. Justice Shah was the Presiding Judge of the Bench which dismissed Bhullar's appeal in 2002. The other two Judges were Justice Arijit Pasayat and Justice B.N.Agrawal.</p><p align="justify">When asked if according to Section 432(2) of Criminal Procedure Code, his opinion ought to have been taken while deciding on the mercy petition, Justice Shah replied: &quot;There are laid procedures and I don't wish to comment if I should or must have been consulted. And then, I had already retired by then,&quot; he said. </p><p align="justify">Bhullar submitted his mercy petition to the President on January 14, 2003. Justice Shah retired from the Supreme Court on September 24, 2003. The Ministry of Home Affairs sent its first recommendation to reject Bhullar's mercy petition to the then President, Abdul Kalam on July 11, 2005. It was left to his successor, Ms.Pratibha Patil to finally reject his mercy petition on the basis of a fresh recommendation from the MHA in 2011.</p><p align="justify">The chronology clearly establishes that had the then NDA Government wanted, it could have obtained Justice Shah's opinion and reasoning under Section 432(2) of Cr.P.C., as suggested by the majority Judges in their opinion, before Justice Shah retired in 2003.</p><p align="justify">Justice Shah's reference to normal procedure in such cases - where the appropriate Government fails to follow the procedure laid down by Section 432(2) of Cr.P.C. and as suggested by the Supreme Court itself - thus assumes significance. </p><p align="justify">&nbsp;</p>' $lang = 'English' $SITE_URL = 'https://im4change.in/' $site_title = 'im4change' $adminprix = 'admin'</pre><pre class="stack-trace">include - APP/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp, line 8 Cake\View\View::_evaluate() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 1413 Cake\View\View::_render() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 1374 Cake\View\View::renderLayout() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 927 Cake\View\View::render() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 885 Cake\Controller\Controller::render() - CORE/src/Controller/Controller.php, line 791 Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::_invoke() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 126 Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::dispatch() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 94 Cake\Http\BaseApplication::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/BaseApplication.php, line 235 Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65 Cake\Routing\Middleware\RoutingMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/RoutingMiddleware.php, line 162 Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65 Cake\Routing\Middleware\AssetMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/AssetMiddleware.php, line 88 Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65 Cake\Error\Middleware\ErrorHandlerMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Error/Middleware/ErrorHandlerMiddleware.php, line 96 Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65 Cake\Http\Runner::run() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 51</pre></div></pre>latest-news-updates/there-is-case-for-commuting-bhullar-sentence-mb-shah-darshan-desai-and-v-venkatesan-20569.html"/> <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"/> <link href="https://im4change.in/css/control.css" rel="stylesheet" type="text/css" media="all"/> <title>LATEST NEWS UPDATES | There is case for commuting Bhullar sentence: MB Shah-Darshan Desai and V Venkatesan | Im4change.org</title> <meta name="description" content=" -The Hindu Death-row convict, Devender Pal Singh Bhullar, whose writ petition against the rejection of his mercy petition on the ground of inordinate and unexplained delay was dismissed by the Supreme Court on April 12, perhaps, has reason for hope..."/> <script src="https://im4change.in/js/jquery-1.10.2.js"></script> <script type="text/javascript" src="https://im4change.in/js/jquery-migrate.min.js"></script> <script language="javascript" type="text/javascript"> $(document).ready(function () { var img = $("img")[0]; // Get my img elem var pic_real_width, pic_real_height; $("<img/>") // Make in memory copy of image to avoid css issues .attr("src", $(img).attr("src")) .load(function () { pic_real_width = this.width; // Note: $(this).width() will not pic_real_height = this.height; // work for in memory images. }); }); </script> <style type="text/css"> @media screen { div.divFooter { display: block; } } @media print { .printbutton { display: none !important; } } </style> </head> <body> <table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" border="0" width="98%" align="center"> <tr> <td class="top_bg"> <div class="divFooter"> <img src="https://im4change.in/images/logo1.jpg" height="59" border="0" alt="Resource centre on India's rural distress" style="padding-top:14px;"/> </div> </td> </tr> <tr> <td id="topspace"> </td> </tr> <tr id="topspace"> <td> </td> </tr> <tr> <td height="50" style="border-bottom:1px solid #000; padding-top:10px;" class="printbutton"> <form><input type="button" value=" Print this page " onclick="window.print();return false;"/></form> </td> </tr> <tr> <td width="100%"> <h1 class="news_headlines" style="font-style:normal"> <strong>There is case for commuting Bhullar sentence: MB Shah-Darshan Desai and V Venkatesan</strong></h1> </td> </tr> <tr> <td width="100%" style="font-family:Arial, 'Segoe Script', 'Segoe UI', sans-serif, serif"><font size="3"> <div align="justify">-The Hindu</div><p align="justify"><br />Death-row convict, Devender Pal Singh Bhullar, whose writ petition against the rejection of his mercy petition on the ground of inordinate and unexplained delay was dismissed by the Supreme Court on April 12, perhaps, has reason for hope with a former Judge of the Supreme Court, Justice M.B. Shah, reiterating his case for commuting his death sentence.</p><p align="justify">Justice Shah was the dissenting Judge who found Bhullar innocent, while two other Judges on the Supreme Court Bench found him guilty while dismissing in 2002 his appeal against TADA Court's death sentence in the 1993 blasts case in New Delhi in which nine persons were killed and 17 injured. Justice Shah - again dissenting from his two colleagues on the Bench - partly accepted Bhullar's review petition in 2002, by directing commutation of his death sentence to life imprisonment, in view of his dissent, which did not make it a ‘rarest of rare case'.</p><p align="justify">Justice Shah, who now lives in Ahmedabad, told The Hindu on Saturday that "the normal procedure in death penalty cases is that when there is a dissenting judgment, it gets converted into life sentence."</p><p align="justify"> "I don't know why this was not followed in this case," he said, when asked further about the majority Judges' suggestion (in their separate judgment in 2002) that the Government could consider Justice Shah's dissent in the context of Section 432(2) of Code of Criminal Procedure (Cr.P.C.).</p><p align="justify">This provision states that whenever an application is made to the appropriate Government for the suspension or remission of a sentence, the Government may require the presiding Judge of the Court which confirmed the sentence, to state his opinion as whether the application should be granted or refused, together with his reasons for such opinion.</p><p align="justify">Although this requirement is an option before the Government, the majority Judges suggested this as a way out of the possible dilemma before the Government in view of Justice Shah's dissent. It clearly implied that the majority Judges too would have wanted Bhullar's sentence finally commuted by the Government using the option provided by Section 432(2) Cr.P.C. Justice Shah was the Presiding Judge of the Bench which dismissed Bhullar's appeal in 2002. The other two Judges were Justice Arijit Pasayat and Justice B.N.Agrawal.</p><p align="justify">When asked if according to Section 432(2) of Criminal Procedure Code, his opinion ought to have been taken while deciding on the mercy petition, Justice Shah replied: "There are laid procedures and I don't wish to comment if I should or must have been consulted. And then, I had already retired by then," he said. </p><p align="justify">Bhullar submitted his mercy petition to the President on January 14, 2003. Justice Shah retired from the Supreme Court on September 24, 2003. The Ministry of Home Affairs sent its first recommendation to reject Bhullar's mercy petition to the then President, Abdul Kalam on July 11, 2005. It was left to his successor, Ms.Pratibha Patil to finally reject his mercy petition on the basis of a fresh recommendation from the MHA in 2011.</p><p align="justify">The chronology clearly establishes that had the then NDA Government wanted, it could have obtained Justice Shah's opinion and reasoning under Section 432(2) of Cr.P.C., as suggested by the majority Judges in their opinion, before Justice Shah retired in 2003.</p><p align="justify">Justice Shah's reference to normal procedure in such cases - where the appropriate Government fails to follow the procedure laid down by Section 432(2) of Cr.P.C. and as suggested by the Supreme Court itself - thus assumes significance. </p><p align="justify"> </p> </font> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> </tr> <tr> <td height="50" style="border-top:1px solid #000; border-bottom:1px solid #000;padding-top:10px;"> <form><input type="button" value=" Print this page " onclick="window.print();return false;"/></form> </td> </tr> </table></body> </html>' } $maxBufferLength = (int) 8192 $file = '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Error/Debugger.php' $line = (int) 853 $message = 'Unable to emit headers. Headers sent in file=/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Error/Debugger.php line=853'Cake\Http\ResponseEmitter::emit() - CORE/src/Http/ResponseEmitter.php, line 48 Cake\Http\Server::emit() - CORE/src/Http/Server.php, line 141 [main] - ROOT/webroot/index.php, line 39
Warning (2): Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Error/Debugger.php:853) [CORE/src/Http/ResponseEmitter.php, line 148]Code Context$response->getStatusCode(),
($reasonPhrase ? ' ' . $reasonPhrase : '')
));
$response = object(Cake\Http\Response) { 'status' => (int) 200, 'contentType' => 'text/html', 'headers' => [ 'Content-Type' => [ [maximum depth reached] ] ], 'file' => null, 'fileRange' => [], 'cookies' => object(Cake\Http\Cookie\CookieCollection) {}, 'cacheDirectives' => [], 'body' => '<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Transitional//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-transitional.dtd"> <html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"> <head> <link rel="canonical" href="https://im4change.in/<pre class="cake-error"><a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="document.getElementById('cakeErr67f45d0e45667-trace').style.display = (document.getElementById('cakeErr67f45d0e45667-trace').style.display == 'none' ? '' : 'none');"><b>Notice</b> (8)</a>: Undefined variable: urlPrefix [<b>APP/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp</b>, line <b>8</b>]<div id="cakeErr67f45d0e45667-trace" class="cake-stack-trace" style="display: none;"><a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="document.getElementById('cakeErr67f45d0e45667-code').style.display = (document.getElementById('cakeErr67f45d0e45667-code').style.display == 'none' ? '' : 'none')">Code</a> <a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="document.getElementById('cakeErr67f45d0e45667-context').style.display = (document.getElementById('cakeErr67f45d0e45667-context').style.display == 'none' ? '' : 'none')">Context</a><pre id="cakeErr67f45d0e45667-code" class="cake-code-dump" style="display: none;"><code><span style="color: #000000"><span style="color: #0000BB"></span><span style="color: #007700"><</span><span style="color: #0000BB">head</span><span style="color: #007700">> </span></span></code> <span class="code-highlight"><code><span style="color: #000000"> <link rel="canonical" href="<span style="color: #0000BB"><?php </span><span style="color: #007700">echo </span><span style="color: #0000BB">Configure</span><span style="color: #007700">::</span><span style="color: #0000BB">read</span><span style="color: #007700">(</span><span style="color: #DD0000">'SITE_URL'</span><span style="color: #007700">); </span><span style="color: #0000BB">?><?php </span><span style="color: #007700">echo </span><span style="color: #0000BB">$urlPrefix</span><span style="color: #007700">;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">?><?php </span><span style="color: #007700">echo </span><span style="color: #0000BB">$article_current</span><span style="color: #007700">-></span><span style="color: #0000BB">category</span><span style="color: #007700">-></span><span style="color: #0000BB">slug</span><span style="color: #007700">; </span><span style="color: #0000BB">?></span>/<span style="color: #0000BB"><?php </span><span style="color: #007700">echo </span><span style="color: #0000BB">$article_current</span><span style="color: #007700">-></span><span style="color: #0000BB">seo_url</span><span style="color: #007700">; </span><span style="color: #0000BB">?></span>.html"/> </span></code></span> <code><span style="color: #000000"><span style="color: #0000BB"> </span><span style="color: #007700"><</span><span style="color: #0000BB">meta http</span><span style="color: #007700">-</span><span style="color: #0000BB">equiv</span><span style="color: #007700">=</span><span style="color: #DD0000">"Content-Type" </span><span style="color: #0000BB">content</span><span style="color: #007700">=</span><span style="color: #DD0000">"text/html; charset=utf-8"</span><span style="color: #007700">/> </span></span></code></pre><pre id="cakeErr67f45d0e45667-context" class="cake-context" style="display: none;">$viewFile = '/home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp' $dataForView = [ 'article_current' => object(App\Model\Entity\Article) { 'id' => (int) 20427, 'title' => 'There is case for commuting Bhullar sentence: MB Shah-Darshan Desai and V Venkatesan', 'subheading' => '', 'description' => '<div align="justify"> -The Hindu </div> <p align="justify"> <br /> Death-row convict, Devender Pal Singh Bhullar, whose writ petition against the rejection of his mercy petition on the ground of inordinate and unexplained delay was dismissed by the Supreme Court on April 12, perhaps, has reason for hope with a former Judge of the Supreme Court, Justice M.B. Shah, reiterating his case for commuting his death sentence. </p> <p align="justify"> Justice Shah was the dissenting Judge who found Bhullar innocent, while two other Judges on the Supreme Court Bench found him guilty while dismissing in 2002 his appeal against TADA Court's death sentence in the 1993 blasts case in New Delhi in which nine persons were killed and 17 injured. Justice Shah - again dissenting from his two colleagues on the Bench - partly accepted Bhullar's review petition in 2002, by directing commutation of his death sentence to life imprisonment, in view of his dissent, which did not make it a &lsquo;rarest of rare case'. </p> <p align="justify"> Justice Shah, who now lives in Ahmedabad, told The Hindu on Saturday that &quot;the normal procedure in death penalty cases is that when there is a dissenting judgment, it gets converted into life sentence.&quot; </p> <p align="justify"> &quot;I don't know why this was not followed in this case,&quot; he said, when asked further about the majority Judges' suggestion (in their separate judgment in 2002) that the Government could consider Justice Shah's dissent in the context of Section 432(2) of Code of Criminal Procedure (Cr.P.C.). </p> <p align="justify"> This provision states that whenever an application is made to the appropriate Government for the suspension or remission of a sentence, the Government may require the presiding Judge of the Court which confirmed the sentence, to state his opinion as whether the application should be granted or refused, together with his reasons for such opinion. </p> <p align="justify"> Although this requirement is an option before the Government, the majority Judges suggested this as a way out of the possible dilemma before the Government in view of Justice Shah's dissent. It clearly implied that the majority Judges too would have wanted Bhullar's sentence finally commuted by the Government using the option provided by Section 432(2) Cr.P.C. Justice Shah was the Presiding Judge of the Bench which dismissed Bhullar's appeal in 2002. The other two Judges were Justice Arijit Pasayat and Justice B.N.Agrawal. </p> <p align="justify"> When asked if according to Section 432(2) of Criminal Procedure Code, his opinion ought to have been taken while deciding on the mercy petition, Justice Shah replied: &quot;There are laid procedures and I don't wish to comment if I should or must have been consulted. And then, I had already retired by then,&quot; he said. </p> <p align="justify"> Bhullar submitted his mercy petition to the President on January 14, 2003. Justice Shah retired from the Supreme Court on September 24, 2003. The Ministry of Home Affairs sent its first recommendation to reject Bhullar's mercy petition to the then President, Abdul Kalam on July 11, 2005. It was left to his successor, Ms.Pratibha Patil to finally reject his mercy petition on the basis of a fresh recommendation from the MHA in 2011. </p> <p align="justify"> The chronology clearly establishes that had the then NDA Government wanted, it could have obtained Justice Shah's opinion and reasoning under Section 432(2) of Cr.P.C., as suggested by the majority Judges in their opinion, before Justice Shah retired in 2003. </p> <p align="justify"> Justice Shah's reference to normal procedure in such cases - where the appropriate Government fails to follow the procedure laid down by Section 432(2) of Cr.P.C. and as suggested by the Supreme Court itself - thus assumes significance. </p> <p align="justify"> &nbsp; </p>', 'credit_writer' => 'The Hindu, 21 April, 2013, http://www.thehindu.com/todays-paper/tp-national/there-is-case-for-commuting-bhullar-sentence-mb-shah/article4638737.ece', 'article_img' => '', 'article_img_thumb' => '', 'status' => (int) 1, 'show_on_home' => (int) 1, 'lang' => 'EN', 'category_id' => (int) 16, 'tag_keyword' => '', 'seo_url' => 'there-is-case-for-commuting-bhullar-sentence-mb-shah-darshan-desai-and-v-venkatesan-20569', 'meta_title' => null, 'meta_keywords' => null, 'meta_description' => null, 'noindex' => (int) 0, 'publish_date' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenDate) {}, 'most_visit_section_id' => null, 'article_big_img' => null, 'liveid' => (int) 20569, 'created' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {}, 'modified' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {}, 'edate' => '', 'tags' => [ [maximum depth reached] ], 'category' => object(App\Model\Entity\Category) {}, '[new]' => false, '[accessible]' => [ [maximum depth reached] ], '[dirty]' => [[maximum depth reached]], '[original]' => [[maximum depth reached]], '[virtual]' => [[maximum depth reached]], '[hasErrors]' => false, '[errors]' => [[maximum depth reached]], '[invalid]' => [[maximum depth reached]], '[repository]' => 'Articles' }, 'articleid' => (int) 20427, 'metaTitle' => 'LATEST NEWS UPDATES | There is case for commuting Bhullar sentence: MB Shah-Darshan Desai and V Venkatesan', 'metaKeywords' => 'crime,Law and Justice', 'metaDesc' => ' -The Hindu Death-row convict, Devender Pal Singh Bhullar, whose writ petition against the rejection of his mercy petition on the ground of inordinate and unexplained delay was dismissed by the Supreme Court on April 12, perhaps, has reason for hope...', 'disp' => '<div align="justify">-The Hindu</div><p align="justify"><br />Death-row convict, Devender Pal Singh Bhullar, whose writ petition against the rejection of his mercy petition on the ground of inordinate and unexplained delay was dismissed by the Supreme Court on April 12, perhaps, has reason for hope with a former Judge of the Supreme Court, Justice M.B. Shah, reiterating his case for commuting his death sentence.</p><p align="justify">Justice Shah was the dissenting Judge who found Bhullar innocent, while two other Judges on the Supreme Court Bench found him guilty while dismissing in 2002 his appeal against TADA Court's death sentence in the 1993 blasts case in New Delhi in which nine persons were killed and 17 injured. Justice Shah - again dissenting from his two colleagues on the Bench - partly accepted Bhullar's review petition in 2002, by directing commutation of his death sentence to life imprisonment, in view of his dissent, which did not make it a &lsquo;rarest of rare case'.</p><p align="justify">Justice Shah, who now lives in Ahmedabad, told The Hindu on Saturday that &quot;the normal procedure in death penalty cases is that when there is a dissenting judgment, it gets converted into life sentence.&quot;</p><p align="justify"> &quot;I don't know why this was not followed in this case,&quot; he said, when asked further about the majority Judges' suggestion (in their separate judgment in 2002) that the Government could consider Justice Shah's dissent in the context of Section 432(2) of Code of Criminal Procedure (Cr.P.C.).</p><p align="justify">This provision states that whenever an application is made to the appropriate Government for the suspension or remission of a sentence, the Government may require the presiding Judge of the Court which confirmed the sentence, to state his opinion as whether the application should be granted or refused, together with his reasons for such opinion.</p><p align="justify">Although this requirement is an option before the Government, the majority Judges suggested this as a way out of the possible dilemma before the Government in view of Justice Shah's dissent. It clearly implied that the majority Judges too would have wanted Bhullar's sentence finally commuted by the Government using the option provided by Section 432(2) Cr.P.C. Justice Shah was the Presiding Judge of the Bench which dismissed Bhullar's appeal in 2002. The other two Judges were Justice Arijit Pasayat and Justice B.N.Agrawal.</p><p align="justify">When asked if according to Section 432(2) of Criminal Procedure Code, his opinion ought to have been taken while deciding on the mercy petition, Justice Shah replied: &quot;There are laid procedures and I don't wish to comment if I should or must have been consulted. And then, I had already retired by then,&quot; he said. </p><p align="justify">Bhullar submitted his mercy petition to the President on January 14, 2003. Justice Shah retired from the Supreme Court on September 24, 2003. The Ministry of Home Affairs sent its first recommendation to reject Bhullar's mercy petition to the then President, Abdul Kalam on July 11, 2005. It was left to his successor, Ms.Pratibha Patil to finally reject his mercy petition on the basis of a fresh recommendation from the MHA in 2011.</p><p align="justify">The chronology clearly establishes that had the then NDA Government wanted, it could have obtained Justice Shah's opinion and reasoning under Section 432(2) of Cr.P.C., as suggested by the majority Judges in their opinion, before Justice Shah retired in 2003.</p><p align="justify">Justice Shah's reference to normal procedure in such cases - where the appropriate Government fails to follow the procedure laid down by Section 432(2) of Cr.P.C. and as suggested by the Supreme Court itself - thus assumes significance. </p><p align="justify">&nbsp;</p>', 'lang' => 'English', 'SITE_URL' => 'https://im4change.in/', 'site_title' => 'im4change', 'adminprix' => 'admin' ] $article_current = object(App\Model\Entity\Article) { 'id' => (int) 20427, 'title' => 'There is case for commuting Bhullar sentence: MB Shah-Darshan Desai and V Venkatesan', 'subheading' => '', 'description' => '<div align="justify"> -The Hindu </div> <p align="justify"> <br /> Death-row convict, Devender Pal Singh Bhullar, whose writ petition against the rejection of his mercy petition on the ground of inordinate and unexplained delay was dismissed by the Supreme Court on April 12, perhaps, has reason for hope with a former Judge of the Supreme Court, Justice M.B. Shah, reiterating his case for commuting his death sentence. </p> <p align="justify"> Justice Shah was the dissenting Judge who found Bhullar innocent, while two other Judges on the Supreme Court Bench found him guilty while dismissing in 2002 his appeal against TADA Court's death sentence in the 1993 blasts case in New Delhi in which nine persons were killed and 17 injured. Justice Shah - again dissenting from his two colleagues on the Bench - partly accepted Bhullar's review petition in 2002, by directing commutation of his death sentence to life imprisonment, in view of his dissent, which did not make it a &lsquo;rarest of rare case'. </p> <p align="justify"> Justice Shah, who now lives in Ahmedabad, told The Hindu on Saturday that &quot;the normal procedure in death penalty cases is that when there is a dissenting judgment, it gets converted into life sentence.&quot; </p> <p align="justify"> &quot;I don't know why this was not followed in this case,&quot; he said, when asked further about the majority Judges' suggestion (in their separate judgment in 2002) that the Government could consider Justice Shah's dissent in the context of Section 432(2) of Code of Criminal Procedure (Cr.P.C.). </p> <p align="justify"> This provision states that whenever an application is made to the appropriate Government for the suspension or remission of a sentence, the Government may require the presiding Judge of the Court which confirmed the sentence, to state his opinion as whether the application should be granted or refused, together with his reasons for such opinion. </p> <p align="justify"> Although this requirement is an option before the Government, the majority Judges suggested this as a way out of the possible dilemma before the Government in view of Justice Shah's dissent. It clearly implied that the majority Judges too would have wanted Bhullar's sentence finally commuted by the Government using the option provided by Section 432(2) Cr.P.C. Justice Shah was the Presiding Judge of the Bench which dismissed Bhullar's appeal in 2002. The other two Judges were Justice Arijit Pasayat and Justice B.N.Agrawal. </p> <p align="justify"> When asked if according to Section 432(2) of Criminal Procedure Code, his opinion ought to have been taken while deciding on the mercy petition, Justice Shah replied: &quot;There are laid procedures and I don't wish to comment if I should or must have been consulted. And then, I had already retired by then,&quot; he said. </p> <p align="justify"> Bhullar submitted his mercy petition to the President on January 14, 2003. Justice Shah retired from the Supreme Court on September 24, 2003. The Ministry of Home Affairs sent its first recommendation to reject Bhullar's mercy petition to the then President, Abdul Kalam on July 11, 2005. It was left to his successor, Ms.Pratibha Patil to finally reject his mercy petition on the basis of a fresh recommendation from the MHA in 2011. </p> <p align="justify"> The chronology clearly establishes that had the then NDA Government wanted, it could have obtained Justice Shah's opinion and reasoning under Section 432(2) of Cr.P.C., as suggested by the majority Judges in their opinion, before Justice Shah retired in 2003. </p> <p align="justify"> Justice Shah's reference to normal procedure in such cases - where the appropriate Government fails to follow the procedure laid down by Section 432(2) of Cr.P.C. and as suggested by the Supreme Court itself - thus assumes significance. </p> <p align="justify"> &nbsp; </p>', 'credit_writer' => 'The Hindu, 21 April, 2013, http://www.thehindu.com/todays-paper/tp-national/there-is-case-for-commuting-bhullar-sentence-mb-shah/article4638737.ece', 'article_img' => '', 'article_img_thumb' => '', 'status' => (int) 1, 'show_on_home' => (int) 1, 'lang' => 'EN', 'category_id' => (int) 16, 'tag_keyword' => '', 'seo_url' => 'there-is-case-for-commuting-bhullar-sentence-mb-shah-darshan-desai-and-v-venkatesan-20569', 'meta_title' => null, 'meta_keywords' => null, 'meta_description' => null, 'noindex' => (int) 0, 'publish_date' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenDate) {}, 'most_visit_section_id' => null, 'article_big_img' => null, 'liveid' => (int) 20569, 'created' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {}, 'modified' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {}, 'edate' => '', 'tags' => [ (int) 0 => object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {}, (int) 1 => object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {} ], 'category' => object(App\Model\Entity\Category) {}, '[new]' => false, '[accessible]' => [ '*' => true, 'id' => false ], '[dirty]' => [], '[original]' => [], '[virtual]' => [], '[hasErrors]' => false, '[errors]' => [], '[invalid]' => [], '[repository]' => 'Articles' } $articleid = (int) 20427 $metaTitle = 'LATEST NEWS UPDATES | There is case for commuting Bhullar sentence: MB Shah-Darshan Desai and V Venkatesan' $metaKeywords = 'crime,Law and Justice' $metaDesc = ' -The Hindu Death-row convict, Devender Pal Singh Bhullar, whose writ petition against the rejection of his mercy petition on the ground of inordinate and unexplained delay was dismissed by the Supreme Court on April 12, perhaps, has reason for hope...' $disp = '<div align="justify">-The Hindu</div><p align="justify"><br />Death-row convict, Devender Pal Singh Bhullar, whose writ petition against the rejection of his mercy petition on the ground of inordinate and unexplained delay was dismissed by the Supreme Court on April 12, perhaps, has reason for hope with a former Judge of the Supreme Court, Justice M.B. Shah, reiterating his case for commuting his death sentence.</p><p align="justify">Justice Shah was the dissenting Judge who found Bhullar innocent, while two other Judges on the Supreme Court Bench found him guilty while dismissing in 2002 his appeal against TADA Court's death sentence in the 1993 blasts case in New Delhi in which nine persons were killed and 17 injured. Justice Shah - again dissenting from his two colleagues on the Bench - partly accepted Bhullar's review petition in 2002, by directing commutation of his death sentence to life imprisonment, in view of his dissent, which did not make it a &lsquo;rarest of rare case'.</p><p align="justify">Justice Shah, who now lives in Ahmedabad, told The Hindu on Saturday that &quot;the normal procedure in death penalty cases is that when there is a dissenting judgment, it gets converted into life sentence.&quot;</p><p align="justify"> &quot;I don't know why this was not followed in this case,&quot; he said, when asked further about the majority Judges' suggestion (in their separate judgment in 2002) that the Government could consider Justice Shah's dissent in the context of Section 432(2) of Code of Criminal Procedure (Cr.P.C.).</p><p align="justify">This provision states that whenever an application is made to the appropriate Government for the suspension or remission of a sentence, the Government may require the presiding Judge of the Court which confirmed the sentence, to state his opinion as whether the application should be granted or refused, together with his reasons for such opinion.</p><p align="justify">Although this requirement is an option before the Government, the majority Judges suggested this as a way out of the possible dilemma before the Government in view of Justice Shah's dissent. It clearly implied that the majority Judges too would have wanted Bhullar's sentence finally commuted by the Government using the option provided by Section 432(2) Cr.P.C. Justice Shah was the Presiding Judge of the Bench which dismissed Bhullar's appeal in 2002. The other two Judges were Justice Arijit Pasayat and Justice B.N.Agrawal.</p><p align="justify">When asked if according to Section 432(2) of Criminal Procedure Code, his opinion ought to have been taken while deciding on the mercy petition, Justice Shah replied: &quot;There are laid procedures and I don't wish to comment if I should or must have been consulted. And then, I had already retired by then,&quot; he said. </p><p align="justify">Bhullar submitted his mercy petition to the President on January 14, 2003. Justice Shah retired from the Supreme Court on September 24, 2003. The Ministry of Home Affairs sent its first recommendation to reject Bhullar's mercy petition to the then President, Abdul Kalam on July 11, 2005. It was left to his successor, Ms.Pratibha Patil to finally reject his mercy petition on the basis of a fresh recommendation from the MHA in 2011.</p><p align="justify">The chronology clearly establishes that had the then NDA Government wanted, it could have obtained Justice Shah's opinion and reasoning under Section 432(2) of Cr.P.C., as suggested by the majority Judges in their opinion, before Justice Shah retired in 2003.</p><p align="justify">Justice Shah's reference to normal procedure in such cases - where the appropriate Government fails to follow the procedure laid down by Section 432(2) of Cr.P.C. and as suggested by the Supreme Court itself - thus assumes significance. </p><p align="justify">&nbsp;</p>' $lang = 'English' $SITE_URL = 'https://im4change.in/' $site_title = 'im4change' $adminprix = 'admin'</pre><pre class="stack-trace">include - APP/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp, line 8 Cake\View\View::_evaluate() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 1413 Cake\View\View::_render() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 1374 Cake\View\View::renderLayout() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 927 Cake\View\View::render() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 885 Cake\Controller\Controller::render() - CORE/src/Controller/Controller.php, line 791 Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::_invoke() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 126 Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::dispatch() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 94 Cake\Http\BaseApplication::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/BaseApplication.php, line 235 Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65 Cake\Routing\Middleware\RoutingMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/RoutingMiddleware.php, line 162 Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65 Cake\Routing\Middleware\AssetMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/AssetMiddleware.php, line 88 Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65 Cake\Error\Middleware\ErrorHandlerMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Error/Middleware/ErrorHandlerMiddleware.php, line 96 Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65 Cake\Http\Runner::run() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 51</pre></div></pre>latest-news-updates/there-is-case-for-commuting-bhullar-sentence-mb-shah-darshan-desai-and-v-venkatesan-20569.html"/> <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"/> <link href="https://im4change.in/css/control.css" rel="stylesheet" type="text/css" media="all"/> <title>LATEST NEWS UPDATES | There is case for commuting Bhullar sentence: MB Shah-Darshan Desai and V Venkatesan | Im4change.org</title> <meta name="description" content=" -The Hindu Death-row convict, Devender Pal Singh Bhullar, whose writ petition against the rejection of his mercy petition on the ground of inordinate and unexplained delay was dismissed by the Supreme Court on April 12, perhaps, has reason for hope..."/> <script src="https://im4change.in/js/jquery-1.10.2.js"></script> <script type="text/javascript" src="https://im4change.in/js/jquery-migrate.min.js"></script> <script language="javascript" type="text/javascript"> $(document).ready(function () { var img = $("img")[0]; // Get my img elem var pic_real_width, pic_real_height; $("<img/>") // Make in memory copy of image to avoid css issues .attr("src", $(img).attr("src")) .load(function () { pic_real_width = this.width; // Note: $(this).width() will not pic_real_height = this.height; // work for in memory images. }); }); </script> <style type="text/css"> @media screen { div.divFooter { display: block; } } @media print { .printbutton { display: none !important; } } </style> </head> <body> <table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" border="0" width="98%" align="center"> <tr> <td class="top_bg"> <div class="divFooter"> <img src="https://im4change.in/images/logo1.jpg" height="59" border="0" alt="Resource centre on India's rural distress" style="padding-top:14px;"/> </div> </td> </tr> <tr> <td id="topspace"> </td> </tr> <tr id="topspace"> <td> </td> </tr> <tr> <td height="50" style="border-bottom:1px solid #000; padding-top:10px;" class="printbutton"> <form><input type="button" value=" Print this page " onclick="window.print();return false;"/></form> </td> </tr> <tr> <td width="100%"> <h1 class="news_headlines" style="font-style:normal"> <strong>There is case for commuting Bhullar sentence: MB Shah-Darshan Desai and V Venkatesan</strong></h1> </td> </tr> <tr> <td width="100%" style="font-family:Arial, 'Segoe Script', 'Segoe UI', sans-serif, serif"><font size="3"> <div align="justify">-The Hindu</div><p align="justify"><br />Death-row convict, Devender Pal Singh Bhullar, whose writ petition against the rejection of his mercy petition on the ground of inordinate and unexplained delay was dismissed by the Supreme Court on April 12, perhaps, has reason for hope with a former Judge of the Supreme Court, Justice M.B. Shah, reiterating his case for commuting his death sentence.</p><p align="justify">Justice Shah was the dissenting Judge who found Bhullar innocent, while two other Judges on the Supreme Court Bench found him guilty while dismissing in 2002 his appeal against TADA Court's death sentence in the 1993 blasts case in New Delhi in which nine persons were killed and 17 injured. Justice Shah - again dissenting from his two colleagues on the Bench - partly accepted Bhullar's review petition in 2002, by directing commutation of his death sentence to life imprisonment, in view of his dissent, which did not make it a ‘rarest of rare case'.</p><p align="justify">Justice Shah, who now lives in Ahmedabad, told The Hindu on Saturday that "the normal procedure in death penalty cases is that when there is a dissenting judgment, it gets converted into life sentence."</p><p align="justify"> "I don't know why this was not followed in this case," he said, when asked further about the majority Judges' suggestion (in their separate judgment in 2002) that the Government could consider Justice Shah's dissent in the context of Section 432(2) of Code of Criminal Procedure (Cr.P.C.).</p><p align="justify">This provision states that whenever an application is made to the appropriate Government for the suspension or remission of a sentence, the Government may require the presiding Judge of the Court which confirmed the sentence, to state his opinion as whether the application should be granted or refused, together with his reasons for such opinion.</p><p align="justify">Although this requirement is an option before the Government, the majority Judges suggested this as a way out of the possible dilemma before the Government in view of Justice Shah's dissent. It clearly implied that the majority Judges too would have wanted Bhullar's sentence finally commuted by the Government using the option provided by Section 432(2) Cr.P.C. Justice Shah was the Presiding Judge of the Bench which dismissed Bhullar's appeal in 2002. The other two Judges were Justice Arijit Pasayat and Justice B.N.Agrawal.</p><p align="justify">When asked if according to Section 432(2) of Criminal Procedure Code, his opinion ought to have been taken while deciding on the mercy petition, Justice Shah replied: "There are laid procedures and I don't wish to comment if I should or must have been consulted. And then, I had already retired by then," he said. </p><p align="justify">Bhullar submitted his mercy petition to the President on January 14, 2003. Justice Shah retired from the Supreme Court on September 24, 2003. The Ministry of Home Affairs sent its first recommendation to reject Bhullar's mercy petition to the then President, Abdul Kalam on July 11, 2005. It was left to his successor, Ms.Pratibha Patil to finally reject his mercy petition on the basis of a fresh recommendation from the MHA in 2011.</p><p align="justify">The chronology clearly establishes that had the then NDA Government wanted, it could have obtained Justice Shah's opinion and reasoning under Section 432(2) of Cr.P.C., as suggested by the majority Judges in their opinion, before Justice Shah retired in 2003.</p><p align="justify">Justice Shah's reference to normal procedure in such cases - where the appropriate Government fails to follow the procedure laid down by Section 432(2) of Cr.P.C. and as suggested by the Supreme Court itself - thus assumes significance. </p><p align="justify"> </p> </font> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> </tr> <tr> <td height="50" style="border-top:1px solid #000; border-bottom:1px solid #000;padding-top:10px;"> <form><input type="button" value=" Print this page " onclick="window.print();return false;"/></form> </td> </tr> </table></body> </html>' } $reasonPhrase = 'OK'header - [internal], line ?? Cake\Http\ResponseEmitter::emitStatusLine() - CORE/src/Http/ResponseEmitter.php, line 148 Cake\Http\ResponseEmitter::emit() - CORE/src/Http/ResponseEmitter.php, line 54 Cake\Http\Server::emit() - CORE/src/Http/Server.php, line 141 [main] - ROOT/webroot/index.php, line 39
Warning (2): Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Error/Debugger.php:853) [CORE/src/Http/ResponseEmitter.php, line 181]Notice (8): Undefined variable: urlPrefix [APP/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp, line 8]Code Context$value
), $first);
$first = false;
$response = object(Cake\Http\Response) { 'status' => (int) 200, 'contentType' => 'text/html', 'headers' => [ 'Content-Type' => [ [maximum depth reached] ] ], 'file' => null, 'fileRange' => [], 'cookies' => object(Cake\Http\Cookie\CookieCollection) {}, 'cacheDirectives' => [], 'body' => '<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Transitional//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-transitional.dtd"> <html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"> <head> <link rel="canonical" href="https://im4change.in/<pre class="cake-error"><a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="document.getElementById('cakeErr67f45d0e45667-trace').style.display = (document.getElementById('cakeErr67f45d0e45667-trace').style.display == 'none' ? '' : 'none');"><b>Notice</b> (8)</a>: Undefined variable: urlPrefix [<b>APP/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp</b>, line <b>8</b>]<div id="cakeErr67f45d0e45667-trace" class="cake-stack-trace" style="display: none;"><a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="document.getElementById('cakeErr67f45d0e45667-code').style.display = (document.getElementById('cakeErr67f45d0e45667-code').style.display == 'none' ? '' : 'none')">Code</a> <a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="document.getElementById('cakeErr67f45d0e45667-context').style.display = (document.getElementById('cakeErr67f45d0e45667-context').style.display == 'none' ? '' : 'none')">Context</a><pre id="cakeErr67f45d0e45667-code" class="cake-code-dump" style="display: none;"><code><span style="color: #000000"><span style="color: #0000BB"></span><span style="color: #007700"><</span><span style="color: #0000BB">head</span><span style="color: #007700">> </span></span></code> <span class="code-highlight"><code><span style="color: #000000"> <link rel="canonical" href="<span style="color: #0000BB"><?php </span><span style="color: #007700">echo </span><span style="color: #0000BB">Configure</span><span style="color: #007700">::</span><span style="color: #0000BB">read</span><span style="color: #007700">(</span><span style="color: #DD0000">'SITE_URL'</span><span style="color: #007700">); </span><span style="color: #0000BB">?><?php </span><span style="color: #007700">echo </span><span style="color: #0000BB">$urlPrefix</span><span style="color: #007700">;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">?><?php </span><span style="color: #007700">echo </span><span style="color: #0000BB">$article_current</span><span style="color: #007700">-></span><span style="color: #0000BB">category</span><span style="color: #007700">-></span><span style="color: #0000BB">slug</span><span style="color: #007700">; </span><span style="color: #0000BB">?></span>/<span style="color: #0000BB"><?php </span><span style="color: #007700">echo </span><span style="color: #0000BB">$article_current</span><span style="color: #007700">-></span><span style="color: #0000BB">seo_url</span><span style="color: #007700">; </span><span style="color: #0000BB">?></span>.html"/> </span></code></span> <code><span style="color: #000000"><span style="color: #0000BB"> </span><span style="color: #007700"><</span><span style="color: #0000BB">meta http</span><span style="color: #007700">-</span><span style="color: #0000BB">equiv</span><span style="color: #007700">=</span><span style="color: #DD0000">"Content-Type" </span><span style="color: #0000BB">content</span><span style="color: #007700">=</span><span style="color: #DD0000">"text/html; charset=utf-8"</span><span style="color: #007700">/> </span></span></code></pre><pre id="cakeErr67f45d0e45667-context" class="cake-context" style="display: none;">$viewFile = '/home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp' $dataForView = [ 'article_current' => object(App\Model\Entity\Article) { 'id' => (int) 20427, 'title' => 'There is case for commuting Bhullar sentence: MB Shah-Darshan Desai and V Venkatesan', 'subheading' => '', 'description' => '<div align="justify"> -The Hindu </div> <p align="justify"> <br /> Death-row convict, Devender Pal Singh Bhullar, whose writ petition against the rejection of his mercy petition on the ground of inordinate and unexplained delay was dismissed by the Supreme Court on April 12, perhaps, has reason for hope with a former Judge of the Supreme Court, Justice M.B. Shah, reiterating his case for commuting his death sentence. </p> <p align="justify"> Justice Shah was the dissenting Judge who found Bhullar innocent, while two other Judges on the Supreme Court Bench found him guilty while dismissing in 2002 his appeal against TADA Court's death sentence in the 1993 blasts case in New Delhi in which nine persons were killed and 17 injured. Justice Shah - again dissenting from his two colleagues on the Bench - partly accepted Bhullar's review petition in 2002, by directing commutation of his death sentence to life imprisonment, in view of his dissent, which did not make it a &lsquo;rarest of rare case'. </p> <p align="justify"> Justice Shah, who now lives in Ahmedabad, told The Hindu on Saturday that &quot;the normal procedure in death penalty cases is that when there is a dissenting judgment, it gets converted into life sentence.&quot; </p> <p align="justify"> &quot;I don't know why this was not followed in this case,&quot; he said, when asked further about the majority Judges' suggestion (in their separate judgment in 2002) that the Government could consider Justice Shah's dissent in the context of Section 432(2) of Code of Criminal Procedure (Cr.P.C.). </p> <p align="justify"> This provision states that whenever an application is made to the appropriate Government for the suspension or remission of a sentence, the Government may require the presiding Judge of the Court which confirmed the sentence, to state his opinion as whether the application should be granted or refused, together with his reasons for such opinion. </p> <p align="justify"> Although this requirement is an option before the Government, the majority Judges suggested this as a way out of the possible dilemma before the Government in view of Justice Shah's dissent. It clearly implied that the majority Judges too would have wanted Bhullar's sentence finally commuted by the Government using the option provided by Section 432(2) Cr.P.C. Justice Shah was the Presiding Judge of the Bench which dismissed Bhullar's appeal in 2002. The other two Judges were Justice Arijit Pasayat and Justice B.N.Agrawal. </p> <p align="justify"> When asked if according to Section 432(2) of Criminal Procedure Code, his opinion ought to have been taken while deciding on the mercy petition, Justice Shah replied: &quot;There are laid procedures and I don't wish to comment if I should or must have been consulted. And then, I had already retired by then,&quot; he said. </p> <p align="justify"> Bhullar submitted his mercy petition to the President on January 14, 2003. Justice Shah retired from the Supreme Court on September 24, 2003. The Ministry of Home Affairs sent its first recommendation to reject Bhullar's mercy petition to the then President, Abdul Kalam on July 11, 2005. It was left to his successor, Ms.Pratibha Patil to finally reject his mercy petition on the basis of a fresh recommendation from the MHA in 2011. </p> <p align="justify"> The chronology clearly establishes that had the then NDA Government wanted, it could have obtained Justice Shah's opinion and reasoning under Section 432(2) of Cr.P.C., as suggested by the majority Judges in their opinion, before Justice Shah retired in 2003. </p> <p align="justify"> Justice Shah's reference to normal procedure in such cases - where the appropriate Government fails to follow the procedure laid down by Section 432(2) of Cr.P.C. and as suggested by the Supreme Court itself - thus assumes significance. </p> <p align="justify"> &nbsp; </p>', 'credit_writer' => 'The Hindu, 21 April, 2013, http://www.thehindu.com/todays-paper/tp-national/there-is-case-for-commuting-bhullar-sentence-mb-shah/article4638737.ece', 'article_img' => '', 'article_img_thumb' => '', 'status' => (int) 1, 'show_on_home' => (int) 1, 'lang' => 'EN', 'category_id' => (int) 16, 'tag_keyword' => '', 'seo_url' => 'there-is-case-for-commuting-bhullar-sentence-mb-shah-darshan-desai-and-v-venkatesan-20569', 'meta_title' => null, 'meta_keywords' => null, 'meta_description' => null, 'noindex' => (int) 0, 'publish_date' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenDate) {}, 'most_visit_section_id' => null, 'article_big_img' => null, 'liveid' => (int) 20569, 'created' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {}, 'modified' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {}, 'edate' => '', 'tags' => [ [maximum depth reached] ], 'category' => object(App\Model\Entity\Category) {}, '[new]' => false, '[accessible]' => [ [maximum depth reached] ], '[dirty]' => [[maximum depth reached]], '[original]' => [[maximum depth reached]], '[virtual]' => [[maximum depth reached]], '[hasErrors]' => false, '[errors]' => [[maximum depth reached]], '[invalid]' => [[maximum depth reached]], '[repository]' => 'Articles' }, 'articleid' => (int) 20427, 'metaTitle' => 'LATEST NEWS UPDATES | There is case for commuting Bhullar sentence: MB Shah-Darshan Desai and V Venkatesan', 'metaKeywords' => 'crime,Law and Justice', 'metaDesc' => ' -The Hindu Death-row convict, Devender Pal Singh Bhullar, whose writ petition against the rejection of his mercy petition on the ground of inordinate and unexplained delay was dismissed by the Supreme Court on April 12, perhaps, has reason for hope...', 'disp' => '<div align="justify">-The Hindu</div><p align="justify"><br />Death-row convict, Devender Pal Singh Bhullar, whose writ petition against the rejection of his mercy petition on the ground of inordinate and unexplained delay was dismissed by the Supreme Court on April 12, perhaps, has reason for hope with a former Judge of the Supreme Court, Justice M.B. Shah, reiterating his case for commuting his death sentence.</p><p align="justify">Justice Shah was the dissenting Judge who found Bhullar innocent, while two other Judges on the Supreme Court Bench found him guilty while dismissing in 2002 his appeal against TADA Court's death sentence in the 1993 blasts case in New Delhi in which nine persons were killed and 17 injured. Justice Shah - again dissenting from his two colleagues on the Bench - partly accepted Bhullar's review petition in 2002, by directing commutation of his death sentence to life imprisonment, in view of his dissent, which did not make it a &lsquo;rarest of rare case'.</p><p align="justify">Justice Shah, who now lives in Ahmedabad, told The Hindu on Saturday that &quot;the normal procedure in death penalty cases is that when there is a dissenting judgment, it gets converted into life sentence.&quot;</p><p align="justify"> &quot;I don't know why this was not followed in this case,&quot; he said, when asked further about the majority Judges' suggestion (in their separate judgment in 2002) that the Government could consider Justice Shah's dissent in the context of Section 432(2) of Code of Criminal Procedure (Cr.P.C.).</p><p align="justify">This provision states that whenever an application is made to the appropriate Government for the suspension or remission of a sentence, the Government may require the presiding Judge of the Court which confirmed the sentence, to state his opinion as whether the application should be granted or refused, together with his reasons for such opinion.</p><p align="justify">Although this requirement is an option before the Government, the majority Judges suggested this as a way out of the possible dilemma before the Government in view of Justice Shah's dissent. It clearly implied that the majority Judges too would have wanted Bhullar's sentence finally commuted by the Government using the option provided by Section 432(2) Cr.P.C. Justice Shah was the Presiding Judge of the Bench which dismissed Bhullar's appeal in 2002. The other two Judges were Justice Arijit Pasayat and Justice B.N.Agrawal.</p><p align="justify">When asked if according to Section 432(2) of Criminal Procedure Code, his opinion ought to have been taken while deciding on the mercy petition, Justice Shah replied: &quot;There are laid procedures and I don't wish to comment if I should or must have been consulted. And then, I had already retired by then,&quot; he said. </p><p align="justify">Bhullar submitted his mercy petition to the President on January 14, 2003. Justice Shah retired from the Supreme Court on September 24, 2003. The Ministry of Home Affairs sent its first recommendation to reject Bhullar's mercy petition to the then President, Abdul Kalam on July 11, 2005. It was left to his successor, Ms.Pratibha Patil to finally reject his mercy petition on the basis of a fresh recommendation from the MHA in 2011.</p><p align="justify">The chronology clearly establishes that had the then NDA Government wanted, it could have obtained Justice Shah's opinion and reasoning under Section 432(2) of Cr.P.C., as suggested by the majority Judges in their opinion, before Justice Shah retired in 2003.</p><p align="justify">Justice Shah's reference to normal procedure in such cases - where the appropriate Government fails to follow the procedure laid down by Section 432(2) of Cr.P.C. and as suggested by the Supreme Court itself - thus assumes significance. </p><p align="justify">&nbsp;</p>', 'lang' => 'English', 'SITE_URL' => 'https://im4change.in/', 'site_title' => 'im4change', 'adminprix' => 'admin' ] $article_current = object(App\Model\Entity\Article) { 'id' => (int) 20427, 'title' => 'There is case for commuting Bhullar sentence: MB Shah-Darshan Desai and V Venkatesan', 'subheading' => '', 'description' => '<div align="justify"> -The Hindu </div> <p align="justify"> <br /> Death-row convict, Devender Pal Singh Bhullar, whose writ petition against the rejection of his mercy petition on the ground of inordinate and unexplained delay was dismissed by the Supreme Court on April 12, perhaps, has reason for hope with a former Judge of the Supreme Court, Justice M.B. Shah, reiterating his case for commuting his death sentence. </p> <p align="justify"> Justice Shah was the dissenting Judge who found Bhullar innocent, while two other Judges on the Supreme Court Bench found him guilty while dismissing in 2002 his appeal against TADA Court's death sentence in the 1993 blasts case in New Delhi in which nine persons were killed and 17 injured. Justice Shah - again dissenting from his two colleagues on the Bench - partly accepted Bhullar's review petition in 2002, by directing commutation of his death sentence to life imprisonment, in view of his dissent, which did not make it a &lsquo;rarest of rare case'. </p> <p align="justify"> Justice Shah, who now lives in Ahmedabad, told The Hindu on Saturday that &quot;the normal procedure in death penalty cases is that when there is a dissenting judgment, it gets converted into life sentence.&quot; </p> <p align="justify"> &quot;I don't know why this was not followed in this case,&quot; he said, when asked further about the majority Judges' suggestion (in their separate judgment in 2002) that the Government could consider Justice Shah's dissent in the context of Section 432(2) of Code of Criminal Procedure (Cr.P.C.). </p> <p align="justify"> This provision states that whenever an application is made to the appropriate Government for the suspension or remission of a sentence, the Government may require the presiding Judge of the Court which confirmed the sentence, to state his opinion as whether the application should be granted or refused, together with his reasons for such opinion. </p> <p align="justify"> Although this requirement is an option before the Government, the majority Judges suggested this as a way out of the possible dilemma before the Government in view of Justice Shah's dissent. It clearly implied that the majority Judges too would have wanted Bhullar's sentence finally commuted by the Government using the option provided by Section 432(2) Cr.P.C. Justice Shah was the Presiding Judge of the Bench which dismissed Bhullar's appeal in 2002. The other two Judges were Justice Arijit Pasayat and Justice B.N.Agrawal. </p> <p align="justify"> When asked if according to Section 432(2) of Criminal Procedure Code, his opinion ought to have been taken while deciding on the mercy petition, Justice Shah replied: &quot;There are laid procedures and I don't wish to comment if I should or must have been consulted. And then, I had already retired by then,&quot; he said. </p> <p align="justify"> Bhullar submitted his mercy petition to the President on January 14, 2003. Justice Shah retired from the Supreme Court on September 24, 2003. The Ministry of Home Affairs sent its first recommendation to reject Bhullar's mercy petition to the then President, Abdul Kalam on July 11, 2005. It was left to his successor, Ms.Pratibha Patil to finally reject his mercy petition on the basis of a fresh recommendation from the MHA in 2011. </p> <p align="justify"> The chronology clearly establishes that had the then NDA Government wanted, it could have obtained Justice Shah's opinion and reasoning under Section 432(2) of Cr.P.C., as suggested by the majority Judges in their opinion, before Justice Shah retired in 2003. </p> <p align="justify"> Justice Shah's reference to normal procedure in such cases - where the appropriate Government fails to follow the procedure laid down by Section 432(2) of Cr.P.C. and as suggested by the Supreme Court itself - thus assumes significance. </p> <p align="justify"> &nbsp; </p>', 'credit_writer' => 'The Hindu, 21 April, 2013, http://www.thehindu.com/todays-paper/tp-national/there-is-case-for-commuting-bhullar-sentence-mb-shah/article4638737.ece', 'article_img' => '', 'article_img_thumb' => '', 'status' => (int) 1, 'show_on_home' => (int) 1, 'lang' => 'EN', 'category_id' => (int) 16, 'tag_keyword' => '', 'seo_url' => 'there-is-case-for-commuting-bhullar-sentence-mb-shah-darshan-desai-and-v-venkatesan-20569', 'meta_title' => null, 'meta_keywords' => null, 'meta_description' => null, 'noindex' => (int) 0, 'publish_date' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenDate) {}, 'most_visit_section_id' => null, 'article_big_img' => null, 'liveid' => (int) 20569, 'created' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {}, 'modified' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {}, 'edate' => '', 'tags' => [ (int) 0 => object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {}, (int) 1 => object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {} ], 'category' => object(App\Model\Entity\Category) {}, '[new]' => false, '[accessible]' => [ '*' => true, 'id' => false ], '[dirty]' => [], '[original]' => [], '[virtual]' => [], '[hasErrors]' => false, '[errors]' => [], '[invalid]' => [], '[repository]' => 'Articles' } $articleid = (int) 20427 $metaTitle = 'LATEST NEWS UPDATES | There is case for commuting Bhullar sentence: MB Shah-Darshan Desai and V Venkatesan' $metaKeywords = 'crime,Law and Justice' $metaDesc = ' -The Hindu Death-row convict, Devender Pal Singh Bhullar, whose writ petition against the rejection of his mercy petition on the ground of inordinate and unexplained delay was dismissed by the Supreme Court on April 12, perhaps, has reason for hope...' $disp = '<div align="justify">-The Hindu</div><p align="justify"><br />Death-row convict, Devender Pal Singh Bhullar, whose writ petition against the rejection of his mercy petition on the ground of inordinate and unexplained delay was dismissed by the Supreme Court on April 12, perhaps, has reason for hope with a former Judge of the Supreme Court, Justice M.B. Shah, reiterating his case for commuting his death sentence.</p><p align="justify">Justice Shah was the dissenting Judge who found Bhullar innocent, while two other Judges on the Supreme Court Bench found him guilty while dismissing in 2002 his appeal against TADA Court's death sentence in the 1993 blasts case in New Delhi in which nine persons were killed and 17 injured. Justice Shah - again dissenting from his two colleagues on the Bench - partly accepted Bhullar's review petition in 2002, by directing commutation of his death sentence to life imprisonment, in view of his dissent, which did not make it a &lsquo;rarest of rare case'.</p><p align="justify">Justice Shah, who now lives in Ahmedabad, told The Hindu on Saturday that &quot;the normal procedure in death penalty cases is that when there is a dissenting judgment, it gets converted into life sentence.&quot;</p><p align="justify"> &quot;I don't know why this was not followed in this case,&quot; he said, when asked further about the majority Judges' suggestion (in their separate judgment in 2002) that the Government could consider Justice Shah's dissent in the context of Section 432(2) of Code of Criminal Procedure (Cr.P.C.).</p><p align="justify">This provision states that whenever an application is made to the appropriate Government for the suspension or remission of a sentence, the Government may require the presiding Judge of the Court which confirmed the sentence, to state his opinion as whether the application should be granted or refused, together with his reasons for such opinion.</p><p align="justify">Although this requirement is an option before the Government, the majority Judges suggested this as a way out of the possible dilemma before the Government in view of Justice Shah's dissent. It clearly implied that the majority Judges too would have wanted Bhullar's sentence finally commuted by the Government using the option provided by Section 432(2) Cr.P.C. Justice Shah was the Presiding Judge of the Bench which dismissed Bhullar's appeal in 2002. The other two Judges were Justice Arijit Pasayat and Justice B.N.Agrawal.</p><p align="justify">When asked if according to Section 432(2) of Criminal Procedure Code, his opinion ought to have been taken while deciding on the mercy petition, Justice Shah replied: &quot;There are laid procedures and I don't wish to comment if I should or must have been consulted. And then, I had already retired by then,&quot; he said. </p><p align="justify">Bhullar submitted his mercy petition to the President on January 14, 2003. Justice Shah retired from the Supreme Court on September 24, 2003. The Ministry of Home Affairs sent its first recommendation to reject Bhullar's mercy petition to the then President, Abdul Kalam on July 11, 2005. It was left to his successor, Ms.Pratibha Patil to finally reject his mercy petition on the basis of a fresh recommendation from the MHA in 2011.</p><p align="justify">The chronology clearly establishes that had the then NDA Government wanted, it could have obtained Justice Shah's opinion and reasoning under Section 432(2) of Cr.P.C., as suggested by the majority Judges in their opinion, before Justice Shah retired in 2003.</p><p align="justify">Justice Shah's reference to normal procedure in such cases - where the appropriate Government fails to follow the procedure laid down by Section 432(2) of Cr.P.C. and as suggested by the Supreme Court itself - thus assumes significance. </p><p align="justify">&nbsp;</p>' $lang = 'English' $SITE_URL = 'https://im4change.in/' $site_title = 'im4change' $adminprix = 'admin'</pre><pre class="stack-trace">include - APP/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp, line 8 Cake\View\View::_evaluate() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 1413 Cake\View\View::_render() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 1374 Cake\View\View::renderLayout() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 927 Cake\View\View::render() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 885 Cake\Controller\Controller::render() - CORE/src/Controller/Controller.php, line 791 Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::_invoke() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 126 Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::dispatch() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 94 Cake\Http\BaseApplication::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/BaseApplication.php, line 235 Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65 Cake\Routing\Middleware\RoutingMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/RoutingMiddleware.php, line 162 Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65 Cake\Routing\Middleware\AssetMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/AssetMiddleware.php, line 88 Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65 Cake\Error\Middleware\ErrorHandlerMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Error/Middleware/ErrorHandlerMiddleware.php, line 96 Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65 Cake\Http\Runner::run() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 51</pre></div></pre>latest-news-updates/there-is-case-for-commuting-bhullar-sentence-mb-shah-darshan-desai-and-v-venkatesan-20569.html"/> <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"/> <link href="https://im4change.in/css/control.css" rel="stylesheet" type="text/css" media="all"/> <title>LATEST NEWS UPDATES | There is case for commuting Bhullar sentence: MB Shah-Darshan Desai and V Venkatesan | Im4change.org</title> <meta name="description" content=" -The Hindu Death-row convict, Devender Pal Singh Bhullar, whose writ petition against the rejection of his mercy petition on the ground of inordinate and unexplained delay was dismissed by the Supreme Court on April 12, perhaps, has reason for hope..."/> <script src="https://im4change.in/js/jquery-1.10.2.js"></script> <script type="text/javascript" src="https://im4change.in/js/jquery-migrate.min.js"></script> <script language="javascript" type="text/javascript"> $(document).ready(function () { var img = $("img")[0]; // Get my img elem var pic_real_width, pic_real_height; $("<img/>") // Make in memory copy of image to avoid css issues .attr("src", $(img).attr("src")) .load(function () { pic_real_width = this.width; // Note: $(this).width() will not pic_real_height = this.height; // work for in memory images. }); }); </script> <style type="text/css"> @media screen { div.divFooter { display: block; } } @media print { .printbutton { display: none !important; } } </style> </head> <body> <table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" border="0" width="98%" align="center"> <tr> <td class="top_bg"> <div class="divFooter"> <img src="https://im4change.in/images/logo1.jpg" height="59" border="0" alt="Resource centre on India's rural distress" style="padding-top:14px;"/> </div> </td> </tr> <tr> <td id="topspace"> </td> </tr> <tr id="topspace"> <td> </td> </tr> <tr> <td height="50" style="border-bottom:1px solid #000; padding-top:10px;" class="printbutton"> <form><input type="button" value=" Print this page " onclick="window.print();return false;"/></form> </td> </tr> <tr> <td width="100%"> <h1 class="news_headlines" style="font-style:normal"> <strong>There is case for commuting Bhullar sentence: MB Shah-Darshan Desai and V Venkatesan</strong></h1> </td> </tr> <tr> <td width="100%" style="font-family:Arial, 'Segoe Script', 'Segoe UI', sans-serif, serif"><font size="3"> <div align="justify">-The Hindu</div><p align="justify"><br />Death-row convict, Devender Pal Singh Bhullar, whose writ petition against the rejection of his mercy petition on the ground of inordinate and unexplained delay was dismissed by the Supreme Court on April 12, perhaps, has reason for hope with a former Judge of the Supreme Court, Justice M.B. Shah, reiterating his case for commuting his death sentence.</p><p align="justify">Justice Shah was the dissenting Judge who found Bhullar innocent, while two other Judges on the Supreme Court Bench found him guilty while dismissing in 2002 his appeal against TADA Court's death sentence in the 1993 blasts case in New Delhi in which nine persons were killed and 17 injured. Justice Shah - again dissenting from his two colleagues on the Bench - partly accepted Bhullar's review petition in 2002, by directing commutation of his death sentence to life imprisonment, in view of his dissent, which did not make it a ‘rarest of rare case'.</p><p align="justify">Justice Shah, who now lives in Ahmedabad, told The Hindu on Saturday that "the normal procedure in death penalty cases is that when there is a dissenting judgment, it gets converted into life sentence."</p><p align="justify"> "I don't know why this was not followed in this case," he said, when asked further about the majority Judges' suggestion (in their separate judgment in 2002) that the Government could consider Justice Shah's dissent in the context of Section 432(2) of Code of Criminal Procedure (Cr.P.C.).</p><p align="justify">This provision states that whenever an application is made to the appropriate Government for the suspension or remission of a sentence, the Government may require the presiding Judge of the Court which confirmed the sentence, to state his opinion as whether the application should be granted or refused, together with his reasons for such opinion.</p><p align="justify">Although this requirement is an option before the Government, the majority Judges suggested this as a way out of the possible dilemma before the Government in view of Justice Shah's dissent. It clearly implied that the majority Judges too would have wanted Bhullar's sentence finally commuted by the Government using the option provided by Section 432(2) Cr.P.C. Justice Shah was the Presiding Judge of the Bench which dismissed Bhullar's appeal in 2002. The other two Judges were Justice Arijit Pasayat and Justice B.N.Agrawal.</p><p align="justify">When asked if according to Section 432(2) of Criminal Procedure Code, his opinion ought to have been taken while deciding on the mercy petition, Justice Shah replied: "There are laid procedures and I don't wish to comment if I should or must have been consulted. And then, I had already retired by then," he said. </p><p align="justify">Bhullar submitted his mercy petition to the President on January 14, 2003. Justice Shah retired from the Supreme Court on September 24, 2003. The Ministry of Home Affairs sent its first recommendation to reject Bhullar's mercy petition to the then President, Abdul Kalam on July 11, 2005. It was left to his successor, Ms.Pratibha Patil to finally reject his mercy petition on the basis of a fresh recommendation from the MHA in 2011.</p><p align="justify">The chronology clearly establishes that had the then NDA Government wanted, it could have obtained Justice Shah's opinion and reasoning under Section 432(2) of Cr.P.C., as suggested by the majority Judges in their opinion, before Justice Shah retired in 2003.</p><p align="justify">Justice Shah's reference to normal procedure in such cases - where the appropriate Government fails to follow the procedure laid down by Section 432(2) of Cr.P.C. and as suggested by the Supreme Court itself - thus assumes significance. </p><p align="justify"> </p> </font> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> </tr> <tr> <td height="50" style="border-top:1px solid #000; border-bottom:1px solid #000;padding-top:10px;"> <form><input type="button" value=" Print this page " onclick="window.print();return false;"/></form> </td> </tr> </table></body> </html>' } $cookies = [] $values = [ (int) 0 => 'text/html; charset=UTF-8' ] $name = 'Content-Type' $first = true $value = 'text/html; charset=UTF-8'header - [internal], line ?? Cake\Http\ResponseEmitter::emitHeaders() - CORE/src/Http/ResponseEmitter.php, line 181 Cake\Http\ResponseEmitter::emit() - CORE/src/Http/ResponseEmitter.php, line 55 Cake\Http\Server::emit() - CORE/src/Http/Server.php, line 141 [main] - ROOT/webroot/index.php, line 39
<head>
<link rel="canonical" href="<?php echo Configure::read('SITE_URL'); ?><?php echo $urlPrefix;?><?php echo $article_current->category->slug; ?>/<?php echo $article_current->seo_url; ?>.html"/>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"/>
$viewFile = '/home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp' $dataForView = [ 'article_current' => object(App\Model\Entity\Article) { 'id' => (int) 20427, 'title' => 'There is case for commuting Bhullar sentence: MB Shah-Darshan Desai and V Venkatesan', 'subheading' => '', 'description' => '<div align="justify"> -The Hindu </div> <p align="justify"> <br /> Death-row convict, Devender Pal Singh Bhullar, whose writ petition against the rejection of his mercy petition on the ground of inordinate and unexplained delay was dismissed by the Supreme Court on April 12, perhaps, has reason for hope with a former Judge of the Supreme Court, Justice M.B. Shah, reiterating his case for commuting his death sentence. </p> <p align="justify"> Justice Shah was the dissenting Judge who found Bhullar innocent, while two other Judges on the Supreme Court Bench found him guilty while dismissing in 2002 his appeal against TADA Court's death sentence in the 1993 blasts case in New Delhi in which nine persons were killed and 17 injured. Justice Shah - again dissenting from his two colleagues on the Bench - partly accepted Bhullar's review petition in 2002, by directing commutation of his death sentence to life imprisonment, in view of his dissent, which did not make it a ‘rarest of rare case'. </p> <p align="justify"> Justice Shah, who now lives in Ahmedabad, told The Hindu on Saturday that "the normal procedure in death penalty cases is that when there is a dissenting judgment, it gets converted into life sentence." </p> <p align="justify"> "I don't know why this was not followed in this case," he said, when asked further about the majority Judges' suggestion (in their separate judgment in 2002) that the Government could consider Justice Shah's dissent in the context of Section 432(2) of Code of Criminal Procedure (Cr.P.C.). </p> <p align="justify"> This provision states that whenever an application is made to the appropriate Government for the suspension or remission of a sentence, the Government may require the presiding Judge of the Court which confirmed the sentence, to state his opinion as whether the application should be granted or refused, together with his reasons for such opinion. </p> <p align="justify"> Although this requirement is an option before the Government, the majority Judges suggested this as a way out of the possible dilemma before the Government in view of Justice Shah's dissent. It clearly implied that the majority Judges too would have wanted Bhullar's sentence finally commuted by the Government using the option provided by Section 432(2) Cr.P.C. Justice Shah was the Presiding Judge of the Bench which dismissed Bhullar's appeal in 2002. The other two Judges were Justice Arijit Pasayat and Justice B.N.Agrawal. </p> <p align="justify"> When asked if according to Section 432(2) of Criminal Procedure Code, his opinion ought to have been taken while deciding on the mercy petition, Justice Shah replied: "There are laid procedures and I don't wish to comment if I should or must have been consulted. And then, I had already retired by then," he said. </p> <p align="justify"> Bhullar submitted his mercy petition to the President on January 14, 2003. Justice Shah retired from the Supreme Court on September 24, 2003. The Ministry of Home Affairs sent its first recommendation to reject Bhullar's mercy petition to the then President, Abdul Kalam on July 11, 2005. It was left to his successor, Ms.Pratibha Patil to finally reject his mercy petition on the basis of a fresh recommendation from the MHA in 2011. </p> <p align="justify"> The chronology clearly establishes that had the then NDA Government wanted, it could have obtained Justice Shah's opinion and reasoning under Section 432(2) of Cr.P.C., as suggested by the majority Judges in their opinion, before Justice Shah retired in 2003. </p> <p align="justify"> Justice Shah's reference to normal procedure in such cases - where the appropriate Government fails to follow the procedure laid down by Section 432(2) of Cr.P.C. and as suggested by the Supreme Court itself - thus assumes significance. </p> <p align="justify"> </p>', 'credit_writer' => 'The Hindu, 21 April, 2013, http://www.thehindu.com/todays-paper/tp-national/there-is-case-for-commuting-bhullar-sentence-mb-shah/article4638737.ece', 'article_img' => '', 'article_img_thumb' => '', 'status' => (int) 1, 'show_on_home' => (int) 1, 'lang' => 'EN', 'category_id' => (int) 16, 'tag_keyword' => '', 'seo_url' => 'there-is-case-for-commuting-bhullar-sentence-mb-shah-darshan-desai-and-v-venkatesan-20569', 'meta_title' => null, 'meta_keywords' => null, 'meta_description' => null, 'noindex' => (int) 0, 'publish_date' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenDate) {}, 'most_visit_section_id' => null, 'article_big_img' => null, 'liveid' => (int) 20569, 'created' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {}, 'modified' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {}, 'edate' => '', 'tags' => [ [maximum depth reached] ], 'category' => object(App\Model\Entity\Category) {}, '[new]' => false, '[accessible]' => [ [maximum depth reached] ], '[dirty]' => [[maximum depth reached]], '[original]' => [[maximum depth reached]], '[virtual]' => [[maximum depth reached]], '[hasErrors]' => false, '[errors]' => [[maximum depth reached]], '[invalid]' => [[maximum depth reached]], '[repository]' => 'Articles' }, 'articleid' => (int) 20427, 'metaTitle' => 'LATEST NEWS UPDATES | There is case for commuting Bhullar sentence: MB Shah-Darshan Desai and V Venkatesan', 'metaKeywords' => 'crime,Law and Justice', 'metaDesc' => ' -The Hindu Death-row convict, Devender Pal Singh Bhullar, whose writ petition against the rejection of his mercy petition on the ground of inordinate and unexplained delay was dismissed by the Supreme Court on April 12, perhaps, has reason for hope...', 'disp' => '<div align="justify">-The Hindu</div><p align="justify"><br />Death-row convict, Devender Pal Singh Bhullar, whose writ petition against the rejection of his mercy petition on the ground of inordinate and unexplained delay was dismissed by the Supreme Court on April 12, perhaps, has reason for hope with a former Judge of the Supreme Court, Justice M.B. Shah, reiterating his case for commuting his death sentence.</p><p align="justify">Justice Shah was the dissenting Judge who found Bhullar innocent, while two other Judges on the Supreme Court Bench found him guilty while dismissing in 2002 his appeal against TADA Court's death sentence in the 1993 blasts case in New Delhi in which nine persons were killed and 17 injured. Justice Shah - again dissenting from his two colleagues on the Bench - partly accepted Bhullar's review petition in 2002, by directing commutation of his death sentence to life imprisonment, in view of his dissent, which did not make it a ‘rarest of rare case'.</p><p align="justify">Justice Shah, who now lives in Ahmedabad, told The Hindu on Saturday that "the normal procedure in death penalty cases is that when there is a dissenting judgment, it gets converted into life sentence."</p><p align="justify"> "I don't know why this was not followed in this case," he said, when asked further about the majority Judges' suggestion (in their separate judgment in 2002) that the Government could consider Justice Shah's dissent in the context of Section 432(2) of Code of Criminal Procedure (Cr.P.C.).</p><p align="justify">This provision states that whenever an application is made to the appropriate Government for the suspension or remission of a sentence, the Government may require the presiding Judge of the Court which confirmed the sentence, to state his opinion as whether the application should be granted or refused, together with his reasons for such opinion.</p><p align="justify">Although this requirement is an option before the Government, the majority Judges suggested this as a way out of the possible dilemma before the Government in view of Justice Shah's dissent. It clearly implied that the majority Judges too would have wanted Bhullar's sentence finally commuted by the Government using the option provided by Section 432(2) Cr.P.C. Justice Shah was the Presiding Judge of the Bench which dismissed Bhullar's appeal in 2002. The other two Judges were Justice Arijit Pasayat and Justice B.N.Agrawal.</p><p align="justify">When asked if according to Section 432(2) of Criminal Procedure Code, his opinion ought to have been taken while deciding on the mercy petition, Justice Shah replied: "There are laid procedures and I don't wish to comment if I should or must have been consulted. And then, I had already retired by then," he said. </p><p align="justify">Bhullar submitted his mercy petition to the President on January 14, 2003. Justice Shah retired from the Supreme Court on September 24, 2003. The Ministry of Home Affairs sent its first recommendation to reject Bhullar's mercy petition to the then President, Abdul Kalam on July 11, 2005. It was left to his successor, Ms.Pratibha Patil to finally reject his mercy petition on the basis of a fresh recommendation from the MHA in 2011.</p><p align="justify">The chronology clearly establishes that had the then NDA Government wanted, it could have obtained Justice Shah's opinion and reasoning under Section 432(2) of Cr.P.C., as suggested by the majority Judges in their opinion, before Justice Shah retired in 2003.</p><p align="justify">Justice Shah's reference to normal procedure in such cases - where the appropriate Government fails to follow the procedure laid down by Section 432(2) of Cr.P.C. and as suggested by the Supreme Court itself - thus assumes significance. </p><p align="justify"> </p>', 'lang' => 'English', 'SITE_URL' => 'https://im4change.in/', 'site_title' => 'im4change', 'adminprix' => 'admin' ] $article_current = object(App\Model\Entity\Article) { 'id' => (int) 20427, 'title' => 'There is case for commuting Bhullar sentence: MB Shah-Darshan Desai and V Venkatesan', 'subheading' => '', 'description' => '<div align="justify"> -The Hindu </div> <p align="justify"> <br /> Death-row convict, Devender Pal Singh Bhullar, whose writ petition against the rejection of his mercy petition on the ground of inordinate and unexplained delay was dismissed by the Supreme Court on April 12, perhaps, has reason for hope with a former Judge of the Supreme Court, Justice M.B. Shah, reiterating his case for commuting his death sentence. </p> <p align="justify"> Justice Shah was the dissenting Judge who found Bhullar innocent, while two other Judges on the Supreme Court Bench found him guilty while dismissing in 2002 his appeal against TADA Court's death sentence in the 1993 blasts case in New Delhi in which nine persons were killed and 17 injured. Justice Shah - again dissenting from his two colleagues on the Bench - partly accepted Bhullar's review petition in 2002, by directing commutation of his death sentence to life imprisonment, in view of his dissent, which did not make it a ‘rarest of rare case'. </p> <p align="justify"> Justice Shah, who now lives in Ahmedabad, told The Hindu on Saturday that "the normal procedure in death penalty cases is that when there is a dissenting judgment, it gets converted into life sentence." </p> <p align="justify"> "I don't know why this was not followed in this case," he said, when asked further about the majority Judges' suggestion (in their separate judgment in 2002) that the Government could consider Justice Shah's dissent in the context of Section 432(2) of Code of Criminal Procedure (Cr.P.C.). </p> <p align="justify"> This provision states that whenever an application is made to the appropriate Government for the suspension or remission of a sentence, the Government may require the presiding Judge of the Court which confirmed the sentence, to state his opinion as whether the application should be granted or refused, together with his reasons for such opinion. </p> <p align="justify"> Although this requirement is an option before the Government, the majority Judges suggested this as a way out of the possible dilemma before the Government in view of Justice Shah's dissent. It clearly implied that the majority Judges too would have wanted Bhullar's sentence finally commuted by the Government using the option provided by Section 432(2) Cr.P.C. Justice Shah was the Presiding Judge of the Bench which dismissed Bhullar's appeal in 2002. The other two Judges were Justice Arijit Pasayat and Justice B.N.Agrawal. </p> <p align="justify"> When asked if according to Section 432(2) of Criminal Procedure Code, his opinion ought to have been taken while deciding on the mercy petition, Justice Shah replied: "There are laid procedures and I don't wish to comment if I should or must have been consulted. And then, I had already retired by then," he said. </p> <p align="justify"> Bhullar submitted his mercy petition to the President on January 14, 2003. Justice Shah retired from the Supreme Court on September 24, 2003. The Ministry of Home Affairs sent its first recommendation to reject Bhullar's mercy petition to the then President, Abdul Kalam on July 11, 2005. It was left to his successor, Ms.Pratibha Patil to finally reject his mercy petition on the basis of a fresh recommendation from the MHA in 2011. </p> <p align="justify"> The chronology clearly establishes that had the then NDA Government wanted, it could have obtained Justice Shah's opinion and reasoning under Section 432(2) of Cr.P.C., as suggested by the majority Judges in their opinion, before Justice Shah retired in 2003. </p> <p align="justify"> Justice Shah's reference to normal procedure in such cases - where the appropriate Government fails to follow the procedure laid down by Section 432(2) of Cr.P.C. and as suggested by the Supreme Court itself - thus assumes significance. </p> <p align="justify"> </p>', 'credit_writer' => 'The Hindu, 21 April, 2013, http://www.thehindu.com/todays-paper/tp-national/there-is-case-for-commuting-bhullar-sentence-mb-shah/article4638737.ece', 'article_img' => '', 'article_img_thumb' => '', 'status' => (int) 1, 'show_on_home' => (int) 1, 'lang' => 'EN', 'category_id' => (int) 16, 'tag_keyword' => '', 'seo_url' => 'there-is-case-for-commuting-bhullar-sentence-mb-shah-darshan-desai-and-v-venkatesan-20569', 'meta_title' => null, 'meta_keywords' => null, 'meta_description' => null, 'noindex' => (int) 0, 'publish_date' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenDate) {}, 'most_visit_section_id' => null, 'article_big_img' => null, 'liveid' => (int) 20569, 'created' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {}, 'modified' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {}, 'edate' => '', 'tags' => [ (int) 0 => object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {}, (int) 1 => object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {} ], 'category' => object(App\Model\Entity\Category) {}, '[new]' => false, '[accessible]' => [ '*' => true, 'id' => false ], '[dirty]' => [], '[original]' => [], '[virtual]' => [], '[hasErrors]' => false, '[errors]' => [], '[invalid]' => [], '[repository]' => 'Articles' } $articleid = (int) 20427 $metaTitle = 'LATEST NEWS UPDATES | There is case for commuting Bhullar sentence: MB Shah-Darshan Desai and V Venkatesan' $metaKeywords = 'crime,Law and Justice' $metaDesc = ' -The Hindu Death-row convict, Devender Pal Singh Bhullar, whose writ petition against the rejection of his mercy petition on the ground of inordinate and unexplained delay was dismissed by the Supreme Court on April 12, perhaps, has reason for hope...' $disp = '<div align="justify">-The Hindu</div><p align="justify"><br />Death-row convict, Devender Pal Singh Bhullar, whose writ petition against the rejection of his mercy petition on the ground of inordinate and unexplained delay was dismissed by the Supreme Court on April 12, perhaps, has reason for hope with a former Judge of the Supreme Court, Justice M.B. Shah, reiterating his case for commuting his death sentence.</p><p align="justify">Justice Shah was the dissenting Judge who found Bhullar innocent, while two other Judges on the Supreme Court Bench found him guilty while dismissing in 2002 his appeal against TADA Court's death sentence in the 1993 blasts case in New Delhi in which nine persons were killed and 17 injured. Justice Shah - again dissenting from his two colleagues on the Bench - partly accepted Bhullar's review petition in 2002, by directing commutation of his death sentence to life imprisonment, in view of his dissent, which did not make it a ‘rarest of rare case'.</p><p align="justify">Justice Shah, who now lives in Ahmedabad, told The Hindu on Saturday that "the normal procedure in death penalty cases is that when there is a dissenting judgment, it gets converted into life sentence."</p><p align="justify"> "I don't know why this was not followed in this case," he said, when asked further about the majority Judges' suggestion (in their separate judgment in 2002) that the Government could consider Justice Shah's dissent in the context of Section 432(2) of Code of Criminal Procedure (Cr.P.C.).</p><p align="justify">This provision states that whenever an application is made to the appropriate Government for the suspension or remission of a sentence, the Government may require the presiding Judge of the Court which confirmed the sentence, to state his opinion as whether the application should be granted or refused, together with his reasons for such opinion.</p><p align="justify">Although this requirement is an option before the Government, the majority Judges suggested this as a way out of the possible dilemma before the Government in view of Justice Shah's dissent. It clearly implied that the majority Judges too would have wanted Bhullar's sentence finally commuted by the Government using the option provided by Section 432(2) Cr.P.C. Justice Shah was the Presiding Judge of the Bench which dismissed Bhullar's appeal in 2002. The other two Judges were Justice Arijit Pasayat and Justice B.N.Agrawal.</p><p align="justify">When asked if according to Section 432(2) of Criminal Procedure Code, his opinion ought to have been taken while deciding on the mercy petition, Justice Shah replied: "There are laid procedures and I don't wish to comment if I should or must have been consulted. And then, I had already retired by then," he said. </p><p align="justify">Bhullar submitted his mercy petition to the President on January 14, 2003. Justice Shah retired from the Supreme Court on September 24, 2003. The Ministry of Home Affairs sent its first recommendation to reject Bhullar's mercy petition to the then President, Abdul Kalam on July 11, 2005. It was left to his successor, Ms.Pratibha Patil to finally reject his mercy petition on the basis of a fresh recommendation from the MHA in 2011.</p><p align="justify">The chronology clearly establishes that had the then NDA Government wanted, it could have obtained Justice Shah's opinion and reasoning under Section 432(2) of Cr.P.C., as suggested by the majority Judges in their opinion, before Justice Shah retired in 2003.</p><p align="justify">Justice Shah's reference to normal procedure in such cases - where the appropriate Government fails to follow the procedure laid down by Section 432(2) of Cr.P.C. and as suggested by the Supreme Court itself - thus assumes significance. </p><p align="justify"> </p>' $lang = 'English' $SITE_URL = 'https://im4change.in/' $site_title = 'im4change' $adminprix = 'admin'
include - APP/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp, line 8 Cake\View\View::_evaluate() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 1413 Cake\View\View::_render() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 1374 Cake\View\View::renderLayout() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 927 Cake\View\View::render() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 885 Cake\Controller\Controller::render() - CORE/src/Controller/Controller.php, line 791 Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::_invoke() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 126 Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::dispatch() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 94 Cake\Http\BaseApplication::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/BaseApplication.php, line 235 Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65 Cake\Routing\Middleware\RoutingMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/RoutingMiddleware.php, line 162 Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65 Cake\Routing\Middleware\AssetMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/AssetMiddleware.php, line 88 Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65 Cake\Error\Middleware\ErrorHandlerMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Error/Middleware/ErrorHandlerMiddleware.php, line 96 Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65 Cake\Http\Runner::run() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 51
![]() |
There is case for commuting Bhullar sentence: MB Shah-Darshan Desai and V Venkatesan |
-The Hindu
Justice Shah was the dissenting Judge who found Bhullar innocent, while two other Judges on the Supreme Court Bench found him guilty while dismissing in 2002 his appeal against TADA Court's death sentence in the 1993 blasts case in New Delhi in which nine persons were killed and 17 injured. Justice Shah - again dissenting from his two colleagues on the Bench - partly accepted Bhullar's review petition in 2002, by directing commutation of his death sentence to life imprisonment, in view of his dissent, which did not make it a ‘rarest of rare case'. Justice Shah, who now lives in Ahmedabad, told The Hindu on Saturday that "the normal procedure in death penalty cases is that when there is a dissenting judgment, it gets converted into life sentence." "I don't know why this was not followed in this case," he said, when asked further about the majority Judges' suggestion (in their separate judgment in 2002) that the Government could consider Justice Shah's dissent in the context of Section 432(2) of Code of Criminal Procedure (Cr.P.C.). This provision states that whenever an application is made to the appropriate Government for the suspension or remission of a sentence, the Government may require the presiding Judge of the Court which confirmed the sentence, to state his opinion as whether the application should be granted or refused, together with his reasons for such opinion. Although this requirement is an option before the Government, the majority Judges suggested this as a way out of the possible dilemma before the Government in view of Justice Shah's dissent. It clearly implied that the majority Judges too would have wanted Bhullar's sentence finally commuted by the Government using the option provided by Section 432(2) Cr.P.C. Justice Shah was the Presiding Judge of the Bench which dismissed Bhullar's appeal in 2002. The other two Judges were Justice Arijit Pasayat and Justice B.N.Agrawal. When asked if according to Section 432(2) of Criminal Procedure Code, his opinion ought to have been taken while deciding on the mercy petition, Justice Shah replied: "There are laid procedures and I don't wish to comment if I should or must have been consulted. And then, I had already retired by then," he said. Bhullar submitted his mercy petition to the President on January 14, 2003. Justice Shah retired from the Supreme Court on September 24, 2003. The Ministry of Home Affairs sent its first recommendation to reject Bhullar's mercy petition to the then President, Abdul Kalam on July 11, 2005. It was left to his successor, Ms.Pratibha Patil to finally reject his mercy petition on the basis of a fresh recommendation from the MHA in 2011. The chronology clearly establishes that had the then NDA Government wanted, it could have obtained Justice Shah's opinion and reasoning under Section 432(2) of Cr.P.C., as suggested by the majority Judges in their opinion, before Justice Shah retired in 2003. Justice Shah's reference to normal procedure in such cases - where the appropriate Government fails to follow the procedure laid down by Section 432(2) of Cr.P.C. and as suggested by the Supreme Court itself - thus assumes significance.
|