Kuljeet Singh @Ranga v Union of India & Anr.[ 1981 AIR 1572; 1981 SCC (3) 324;1981 SCALE (1)676]

Court: Supreme Court Of India

Date of Judgement: 21/04/1981

Citation

• 1981 AIR 1572.
• 1981 SCR (3) 512
• 1981 SCC (3) 324
• 1981 SCALE (1)676

Bench

• Chandrachud Y.V ( (Cj)
• Sen, A.P (J)
• Islam, Baharul (J)

Act

Constitution of India, Article 32 – No Material furnished for justifying the reduction of the death sentence – Dismissed.

Introduction

40 years ago, this was the most infamous case which shocked the whole country. Every news headline was covering this case known as the “Ranga Billa case”.This was a double murder case. Two teenagers, Geeta and Sanjay Chopra children of senior Naval officers were subjected to brutal torture before being murdered cruelly.

According to the charge, sheet filed there were two public witnesses.

1. Inderjeet Singh Noata, a young Junior Engineer of the Delhi Development Authority.
2. Bhagwan Dass, public witness no. 2 came out of Gurudwara.

This case involved the kidnapping and murder of two siblings Geeta and Sanjay.

The siblings were on their way to the All India Radio building at Parliament Street for a radio programme.

Although they were kidnapped for ransom, they were killed after the kidnappers get to know that their father was a Naval officer, in the assumption that he is not rich enough to pay the ransom. Ranga and Billa drove the car and reached the Ridge area.

They stopped the car there and first killed Sanjay. After this both raped Geeta. Billa pulled out a sword and hit Geeta on her neck. Geeta died on the spot. Picked up his body and threw it on the side of the road and fled.

Issues

The convicted challenged the death sentence verdict in Delhi High Court. They filed a petition under article 136 in the Supreme Court of India. The Supreme Court rejected it.

Ranga and Billa now had the option of sending a mercy petition to the President.

But President Neelam Sanjiva Reddy immediately rejected the appeal to waive the death sentence under Article 72,  without citing a reason. They again filed a petition to the Supreme Court arguing that the president should fairly use the clemency power.

Judgement

On 21 April 1981 the supreme court upheld the death sentence under Section 302, they were also convicted for crimes under Section 363 (kidnapping), 365 (kidnapping with unlawful confinement), 366 (kidnapping a woman with intention of sexual intercourse) and 367 (kidnapping with intention to cause hurt)   but This petition had further delayed their death sentence. The trial took 4 years to complete.

Conclusion

In case the President rejects the petition, he may need not give any reason for such rejection. This was observed in this case, in which the nature and ambit of the pardoning power were to be decided.

In this case, the accused was awarded the death sentence and his mercy petition was also rejected by the President. The appellant then filed a writ petition in the Supreme Court that no reasons were given for such rejection.

The Court dismissed the petition and observed that pardon in itself is a discretionary remedy and whether it is granted or rejected it need not be reasoned. There is a condition that a President has to comply with while deciding to use this power.

This article has been contributed by Jyotiska Borah, a student at Nerim Institute Guwahati, Assam.