Source: Delhi High Court

Why in News?

Justice Siddharth Mridul and Justice Amit Sharma reduced/commuted the death sentence to imprisonment for life of a convict involved in Batla house encounter case.

• The Delhi High Court gave this observation in the case of State v. Ariz Khan.

What is the Background of State v. Ariz Khan Case?

• On 13th September 2008, a series of explosive incidents occurred across various locations in Delhi, including Connaught Place, Karol Bagh, Greater Kailash, and India Gate.
• These incidents resulted in the tragic loss of 39 lives, with 159 individuals sustaining injuries.
• Separate First Information Reports (FIRs) were filed at distinct police stations, each pertaining to the specific blast site.
• The allegation suggests that the group known as "Indian Mujaheddin" claimed responsibility for these bombings, conveying their involvement through emails sent to different electronic and print media outlets.
• The investigation into these cases was entrusted to the Special Cell of the Delhi Police.
• The appellant was allegedly involved in the shootout that took place in the case and succeeded in absconding hence he was declared as a proclaimed offender.
• However, Delhi Police succeeded in arresting him.
• He was sentenced to death and directed to be ‘hanged by his neck till he is dead’ for offence committed under Section 302 of the IPC.
• He filed an appeal from conviction under Section 374 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC) before the High Court of Delhi.

What was the Court’s Observation?

• The Delhi HC held that the present case does not fall under the category of rarest of rare cases.

What is Appeal from Conviction under Section 374 CrPC?

• About:
  • Section 374 of CrPC outlines the provisions for appeals to the Supreme Court, HC & Court of Session in cases where a person has been convicted or acquitted by a lower court.
  • The section begins by highlighting the right of appeal available to a convicted person.
• Sub-section 1:
  • Sub-section (1) of Section 374 CrPC states that any person convicted of an offence by a HC in its extraordinary criminal jurisdiction has the right to appeal to the SC.
  • This provision emphasizes the principle of fair and just adjudication, ensuring that individuals convicted at the high court have the opportunity for justice by SC.
• Sub-section 2:
  • Sub-section (2) of Section 374 CrPC specifies that any person convicted on a trial held by a Sessions Judge or an Additional Sessions Judge or on a trial held by any other Court in which a sentence of imprisonment for more than seven years has been passed against him or against any other person convicted at the same trial, may appeal to the High Court.
  • This provision highlights the power of the High Court to hear appeal.
• Sub-section 3:
  • Sub-section (3) of Section 374 CrPC states that any person:
    • convicted on a trial held by a Metropolitan Magistrate or Assistant Sessions Judge or Magistrate of the first class or of the second class, or
    • sentenced under Section 325, or
    • in respect of whom an order has been made or a sentence has been passed under section 360 by any Magistrate, may appeal to the Court of Session.
  • It acknowledges that there may be instances where an acquittal is based on erroneous findings or legal misinterpretations and allows for a Session Court to review such decisions.
• Sub-section 4:
  • Section 374(4) lays down the timeframe within which an appeal must be filed.
  • The appeal for cases related to rape shall be disposed of within a period of six months from the date of filing of such appeal.