Summary
The Supreme Court recalled its common judgment imposing or confirming death sentences on six accused and restored the appeals for fresh hearing. Three accused facing enhancement had no effective opportunity to engage counsel or defend the State’s appeals; an amicus was appointed and heard on the day judgment was reserved. Because the appeals shared the same incident and evidence, fairness required recall for all six. The decision reopened the appeals without determining guilt or sentence afresh.
Issues
- Whether the hearing afforded the accused facing enhancement to death was adequate.
- Whether recall should extend to all six accused in the interlinked appeals.
- What procedural protections should govern rehearing.
Held
- The State’s enhancement appeals began to be heard before notice was served on the affected accused. Appointment of an amicus and conclusion of hearing on the same subsequent day deprived them of an effective opportunity to engage counsel and present their defence. (¶¶ 8, 9, 10)
- The common judgment involved interlinked appeals, common evidence and the same incident. Fairness and propriety required recalling it for all six accused, including those whose death sentences had been confirmed rather than enhanced. (¶ 11)
- The earlier review dismissals were recalled, the reviews allowed and the criminal appeals restored for fresh hearing by the appropriate Bench. Accused Nos.3, 5 and 6 were permitted to appeal their convictions if advised. (¶¶ 12(i), 12(ii), 12(iii))
- Execution of the High Court’s death sentences on Accused Nos.1, 2 and 4 was suspended pending the appeals. The Registry was to call for records if necessary, and the specified criminal miscellaneous petitions were disposed of. (¶¶ 12(iv), 12(v), 12(vi))
Result
Review petitions allowed. Review dismissals and common judgment dated 30 April 2009 recalled; appeals restored for fresh hearing with the stated liberty, suspension of execution and record-production directions.