Today, the Supreme Court issued a notice in response to a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) that aims to challenge the constitutional validity of Section 3(2)(i) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. This particular section of the law prescribes the death penalty for individuals who do not belong to the SC or ST communities, in cases where a member of the SC/ST community has been wrongfully convicted or executed due to false evidence created or supplied by the non-SC/ST individual in question.

At the outset, the Bench consisting of Chief Justice D.Y. Chandrachud, Justice J.B. Pardiwala, and Justice Manoj Misra asked the Petitioner to approach the High Court.

However, the Bench issued notice in the matter. "Issue Notice", ordered the Bench.

The Chief Justice also emphasized that this matter falls under the Mithu case (Mithu v State of Punjab, 1983) 2 SCC 277, which asserts that a compulsory death penalty cannot be enforced. The Chief Justice further pointed out that the Dalbir Singh judgment (State Of Punjab v. Dalbir Singh, 2012 SCC OnLine SC 107) reinforces the same principle.

Case Brief -

In the PIL filed by Kush Karla, represented by Advocate-on-Record Jyotika Kalra, it was argued that Section 3(2)(i) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, violates the safeguard outlined in Article 21 of the Constitution, which guarantees that "No person shall be deprived of their life or personal liberty except in accordance with the procedure established by law." 

Kalra argued that this particular section compels the imposition of the death penalty without allowing for judicial discretion, and therefore, it should be invalidated for being incompatible with the Constitution. The PIL also contended that Section 3(2)(i) of the Atrocities Act constitutes a significant infringement on the right to life and fundamental freedoms. Imposing the death penalty without considering the circumstances in which the crime occurred is not sustainable in a constitutional society like ours

"If mandatory death punishment under section 3(2)(i) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, is allowed to continue, it would defeat the existence of very important provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure namely 235(2) Cr.P.C. as well as sec.354 (3) Cr.P.C. both of which provides for hearing of an accused on the quantum of sentence as well as giving reasons for imposing sentence by the Court. If the Court has no option save to impose the sentence of death, it is meaningless to hear the accused on the question of sentence and it becomes superfluous to state the reasons for imposing the sentence of death. Thus, there is no justification for prescribing a mandatory sentence of death", reads the PIL.

Kalra also relied on the judgement set by the Supreme Court of India in the case of Mithu v. State of Punjab [1983 (2) SCC 277]. In that case, the Supreme Court struck down Section 303 of the Indian Penal Code, which required the imposition of the death penalty on a person serving a life imprisonment sentence who commits murder

Therefore, the petitioner is requesting the Supreme Court to issue a directive to invalidate the provision that mandates the death penalty, as outlined in Section 3(2)(i) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.

Case Title: Kush Kalra Vs. Union Of India & Anr.
.