Author: LEXPEEPS editor

Internship Opportunity: Legal Internship Opportunity at Lex Commerci: Applications Open!

Posted on

ABOUT LEX COMMERCI

Established in 2009, Lex Commerci is a leading full-service law firm  boutique  based  out of Chandigarh Tri-city area, which runs with the vision of becoming a one stop legal support for all its clients.

The team at Lex Commerci comprises seasoned advocates and young bright minds with deep insight in legal drafting, dispute resolution, transaction support, regulatory compliance, contract management, etc. having successfully advised and represented  leading  corporations and governmental organizations on a range of challenging legal issues.

NATURE OF WORK EXPECTED:

The Interns will have the opportunity to assist the Firm in a variety of work like Research Assistance, Article Writing and Arbitration with a focus on the Energy and Infrastructure Industry. This shall be full time internship for a duration of 6 weeks.

WHO CAN APPLY?

The following are the prerequisites :

  • Strong Aptitude for Legal Research.
  • Excellent written and verbal communications skills including strong presentation skills
  • Strong relationship-building skills.
  • Ability to work autonomously and as part of a team.
  • Good organizational skills and capacity to be detail-oriented. High level of integrity and professional accountability.
  • A passion for the field of law
  • Applicants in their 3rd Year and above (in 5-year law course) or 2nd Year and above (in 3-year law course) , from a tier-1 law university, would be preferred.

ADDITIONAL BENEFITS

  • Interning with Lex Commerci has several benefits , which  can be found below:
  • A Stipend (Based on Performance)
  • A Certificate, after having completed your Internship
  • A Letter of Recommendation based on your accomplishments during the internship
  • A pool of accomplishments that you can demonstrate on your resume
  • After completion, the intern will develop a thorough industry knowledge in the field of Energy and Infrastructure; as well as, insights on growing a firm, that you can use

HOW TO APPLY?

Fill the google form CLICK HERE TO APPLY OR Send in your resumes and cover letter to PC@lexcommerci.com with the subject headline as “Application for Legal Internship”.

CONTACT DETAILS:

For further information please visit our website: CLICK HERE

For regular updates, join us:

WhatsApp Group:

https://chat.whatsapp.com/BQ3gYzs6H9Z5SoRYq718zN

Telegram:

https://t.me/lexpeeps

LinkedIn:

https://www.linkedin.com/company/lexpeeps-in-lexpeeps-pvt-ltd

Visit us for more such opportunities: http://lexpeeps.in/

Internship Opportunity: Legal Internship at ELT Consultants, Delhi: Applications Open!

Posted on

About Us:

ELT Consultants is a group of professionals working in the field of Law & litigation, Chartered Accountancy, and Company Secretary. ELT group has associate statutory registered Law firm and CA Firm. 

Skills:

  • Excellent writing and communication skills
  • Highly fluent in English and Hindi
  • Passionate for writing
  • Students preferred knowledge of laws related to Legal Metrology laws, Food Safety laws, Insurance laws, Drugs & Cosmetics laws, BIS laws, Environmental laws, Succession & Inheritance laws, and others.   
  • Highly professional in conduct
  • Go-getter and executors

Responsibilities:

  • Writing Blogs for our websites
  • Creating content for social media websites like Facebook, YouTube, etc.
  • Conduct research on multiple topics like:- 
  • Insurance laws, 
  • Environmental laws, 
  • Legal metrology laws, 
  • Drugs & cosmetics laws and Medical Regulatory Laws
  • Food safety laws etc.
  • Foriegn Direct Investment Laws
  • Intellectual property laws
  • Cyber Laws
  • Estate, inheritance and Succession Laws.
  • Indirect Taxes, GST, Customs, DGFT, FEMA Laws.
  • NGO Laws 
  • Company Law & IBC
  • Proofread and edit blog posts before publication.

Who can apply:

  • Final year students of B.A, LL.B(H)/ LL.B or freshers/graduates can apply
  • Anyone available for a full time (in-office) internship
  • Anyone who can start the internship immediately
  • Anyone who is available for a duration of 2 months and well-deserved candidates may get an opportunity to work with us full time.
  • Preferably living nearby.

Contact us : jobs@easylegaltax.com or +91-8585916617

How to apply?

https://www.linkedin.com/company/easylegaltax1/

For regular updates, join us:

WhatsApp Group:

https://chat.whatsapp.com/CdshAqpiV1FEogy5pBlY43

Telegram:

https://t.me/lexpeeps

LinkedIn:

https://www.linkedin.com/company/lexpeeps-in-lexpeeps-pvt-ltd

Visit us for more such opportunities: http://lexpeeps.in/

Allahabad High Court Flays Petitioner for Filing Bail Plea Directly in HC

Posted on

The Allahabad High Court had recently given a few rules and guidelines for cases where anticipatory bail can be allowed even after the submission of the charge sheet.

On June 5, 2021, The Allahabad High Court came down heavily on a petitioner for documenting anticipatory bail applications straightforwardly in the High Court, expressing that it was necessary to mention special circumstances for applying to the High Court.

Justice Rohit Ranjan Agarwal passed this order while hearing a Criminal Miscellaneous Anticipatory Bail Application under Section 438 documented by Bhopal and two others.

The Anticipatory Bail Application was moved by the candidates straightforwardly under the steady gaze of the Court looking for anticipatory bail for a situation recorded at Police Station Sahibabad in District Ghaziabad of Uttar Pradesh.

The court observed that there must be compelling or special circumstances entitling a party to directly approach the High Court for grant of anticipatory bail

After examining the whole record, the Court tracked down that in the expectant bail application, the candidate has not referenced any convincing or uncommon situation to move toward the Court straightforwardly without the avenue as available before the Court of Sessions being exhausted.

-Report by Anuj Dhar

Near-to-Door Vaccination is Better than Door-to-Door Vaccination: Center Informs Bombay High Court

Posted on

In an affidavit filed with the Mumbai High Court on Tuesday, the Department of Health and Family Welfare stated that vaccination near-to-door would be a more appropriate solution than door-to-door vaccination, On May 20, the Bombay High Court granted the National Expert Group on Vaccine Administration for Covid-19’s (NEGVAC) time until June 1, 2021, to determine on a door-to-door coverage for residents who might now no longer be capable of going to vaccination centers.

All the participants who participated with inside the assembly agreed that covid-19 vaccination couldn’t receive at domestic because of the troubles and dangers stated through the Expert Committee, which became constituted beneath the chairmanship of Dr. NK Arora, Executive Director Inclen Trust to observe the door to door vaccination policy.” the affidavit states.

It cited the following reasons against door-to-door vaccination:

  • Treating adverse events after vaccination (AEFI) in a timely and appropriate manner.
  • Carry out the observation protocol of each beneficiary for 30 minutes after vaccination.
  • Danger of infection by Covid-19 Vaccinators and mobilizers.

The court hears a PIL of two lawyers, Dhruti Kapadia and Kunal Tiwari, asking for instructions from the central and state governments to initiate a door-to-door vaccination campaign for citizens over 75, people with physical disabilities, and bedridden people.

-Report by Manaswa Sharma

Free COVID Jabs to Everyone Above 18: Power of Judicial Review

Posted on

The Supreme Court made a preliminary observation last week and held that the central vaccine policy that does not provide free vaccination for the 18-44 age group is arbitrary and unreasonable.

On Monday, June 7, 2021, Prime Minister Modi announced that free jabs will be provided to everyone above 18 years of age. This is a great example of the power of judicial review.

The Supreme Court raised questions regarding vaccine policy with the center last week. He asked the center to review its vaccination policy. Noting that the center promoted and financed the production of vaccines through concessions, the Supreme Court requested clarification as to whether it stated precisely that private entities are the only ones who bear the risks and manufacturing costs. The financial budget for 2021-22 has been designated Rs 35 billion for the procurement of vaccines, and the Supreme Court had instructed the center to provide data and documents to clarify the use of these funds so far and why they cannot be used to vaccinate people aged 18 to 44 years.

Monday, in his address to the country, Prime Minister Narendra Modi stated that the central government will provide free vaccines to people aged 18 to 44 and has decided to buy 75% of vaccines from vaccine manufacturers, including 25% of the quota. national, and provide free vaccines to countries. Considering that when the constitutional rights of citizens are violated by central policies, the courts cannot be “silent bystanders.” The judge criticized the vaccination policy in an order published on June 2, calling it “ostensibly arbitrary and unreasonable” “and ordered that it should be reviewed.

-Report by Muskan Chanda

False Accusation of Impotency of Spouse will be Considered as Cruelty: Kerala HC

Posted on

Kerala High court on 3rd June 2021, held that false allegation of impotency or erectile dysfunction against a spouse is considered to be “mental cruelty”. This judgment was made in the divorce case of a doctor- couple.
As per the Hindu marriage act, cruelty means that the other party has, after the solemnization of the marriage, treated the petitioner with cruelty. It may be physical or mental. It may be words or gestures or even by mere silence. That’s the reason here false allegation is considered as “mental cruelty”. Whereas cruelty is also a ground for divorce.

The appeal has filed by the husband against the order of the family court. The respondent accused that her husband was impotent and is not able to perform sexually, which was contradicted by her statements and lack of evidence. Despite it, the husband was willing to undergo a medical test.
The advocate for the applicant relied on K.Srinivas Rao v. D.A. Deepa in which it was held that defamatory allegation against the spouse or his or her relatives in the pleadings amounts to causing mental cruelty to the other spouse. And in Gangadharanv, T.K. Thankam, the court held that false, scandalous, malicious, baseless, and unproved allegation made by one spouse, whether by letter or written statement or by any other mode, amounts to cruelty.

Therefore, the Kerala high court bench of justice Muhamed Mustaque and Kauser Edappagath has held that a false allegation of impotency or erectile dysfunction amounts to mental cruelty.

–Report by Riddhi Dubey

Madras HC Justice Anand Venkatesh Shares his Thoughts on LGBT Community and Issues Guidelines

Posted on

On Monday Justice Madras HC Justice Anand Venkatesh expressed his thoughts on homosexual relationships. When the judge was ruling on a petition filed by two lesbian girls asking for protection from their parents who were against their homosexual relationship.

Justice Anand Venkatesh shared his thoughts on LGBT Community while giving direction in a petition filed by a lesbian couple. He revealed that he belongs to the majority one who had hesitation in accepting same-sex relationship completely and also revealed that he had voluntarily taken counseling with Vidya Dinakaran, a Psychologist, for understanding the subject of homosexuality to pass the correct judgment. He explained that how difficult it was on his part to pass judgment on this as he has never known anyone personally who was in such a relationship or had never experienced personally such relationship and that’s the reason he had taken counseling because it helped him to understand reality and emotions behind such homosexual relationship and made him realize that he to need to change his notion.

He said the present case has given this court, not only an opportunity but also a vested responsibility to weigh by cause for inclusivity and justice against discrimination by the heretofore social understanding of morality and notions of tradition. As he also said, “ignorance is no justification for normalizing any form of discrimination”

In the following petition, the court has also issued guidelines to ensure that the LGBT person is not harassed by police and authorities

  • The police, on compliance regarding girl/women/man missing cases which belong to the LGBT community, shall upon receipt of their statements, close the complaint without subjecting them to any harassment.
  • The Ministry of Social Justice & empowerment must list NGOs along with the address, contact details, and services provided shall be published and revised on the official website. And must be published within 8 weeks from the date of order.
  • If a person belonging to LGBT faces any issue may approach NGOs.
  • The NGOs in consultation with MSJE, must maintain the confidentiality of persons who are approaching
  • The problems relating to LGBT Community shall be addressed with the best-suited method depending upon the facts and circumstances of the case.
  • Changes should be made in existing stay homes to accommodate a member of the LGBT Community who requires shelters.
  • The Union and State Government shall endeavor to device such measures and policies for eliminating prejudice against LGBT Community.
  • And creating awareness, the court suggests sensitization programs.

-Report by Riddhi Dubey

Supreme Court asks Centre to Detail Scheme for Children Orphaned due to COVID

Posted on

SC will continue to proceed with the hearings concerning children who have lost one or both parents, who have been abandoned or orphaned due to COVID-19.

On 28th May, The bench of Justice L. Nageswara Rao and Justice Aniruddha Bose had directed all the local authorities of districts to upload the information of children who became orphans or got abandoned by their families due to the ongoing pandemic on ‘Bal Swaraj’ the portal of NCPCR before 29th May. As per the reports of, National Commission for Protection of Child Rights, 1742 children have become orphans and 7464 children have lost either of their parents during the pandemic.

On May 29, 2021, Prime Minister Narendra Modi announced the scheme for these children which is ‘PM Cares for Children”.
According to the available information about the scheme, children who have lost both the parents or surviving parent or legal guardian/ adopted parents during COVID-19 shall be the beneficiaries of aid from the Central Government, but the scheme needs to be worked out. Till now, nobody is aware of how many children will be benefited from the scheme and how it will be implemented. The Centre has been provided some time to apprise about the scheme and execute it.

Today, Supreme Court has passed orders concerning orphaned children and directed authorities:

  • To stop illegal adoption of children orphaned by Covid. Public advertisements for adoptions are unlawful.
  • The state gov. /union territories are directed to prevent any NGO from collecting funds in the names of affected children disclosing their identities and giving them for adoption.
  • Stringent action shall be taken by the state gov. /union territories against agencies or individuals who are involved in the illegal activities related to the adoption of children.
  • No adoption will be allowed of Covid orphaned children according to the provisions of Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015. No adoption is permitted without the involvement of the Central Adoption Resource Authority (CARA).

–Report by Muskan Chanda

IT Rules 2021

Posted on

This article is written by Shrey Hasija, a first-year law student at Vivekananda Institute of Professional Studies, GGSIPU, and Swagata Sharma, a second-year law student at National Education Foundation Law College. This article is an overview of  New IT Rules 2021 and why it is controversial.

INTRODUCTION

New Information Technology Rules also known as New IT Rules 2021, introduced by the Ministry of Electronics and Information is secondary legislation that subdues India’s Intermediary Guidelines Rules 2011. On February 25th, 2021, the Government has notified about the IT rules giving social media platforms 3 months to comply.  According to the new rules, all the Social Media handles require to remove unlawful content uploaded in the said social media platform within the time frame provided by a court order or a notice by a government agency. Also, it is now clearly stated that Social Media platforms need to follow the Constitution and Laws of India. They have also introduced Grievance Redressal for the user and appoint a Resident Grievance Officer[i], Chief complying officer, and nodal contact person in their companies.

Reason Behind the Introduction of New Rules

Recent times have witnessed an increase in usages of the digital platform, here the most concerning part about the increase of criminals and anti-national elements through misuse of social media like scams, frauds, cheating, harassment, etc. Another most highlighted issue is related to the OTT platform. Like we always know everything has both positive and negative[ii] sides it is also almost the same in the case of them, many matured content or defamatory content are now witnessed on live streaming which has marked a very negative impact on society. So Ministry of Electronics and Information has to take this step to maintain the positive impact of social media or OTT platforms and decrease the adverse effect.

Benefits of New Regulation

  •   It will lessen the responsibility by reducing from being necessary to be best to achieve the goal.
  •   It will reduce the scope of unlawful content.
  •  It will help in solving the problems faced by the public such as scams, defamation, harassment, etc.
  • It will help the Government to monitor International criminals, offenders (who were living among us) and capture them by encrypting their details.[iii]

Highlights of New Regulation

  • If any person receives a court order from a government agency for their content, they must remove the content from the said social media within the time frame of 36 hours.
  • A grievance officer will be appointed to resolve the complaints within 15 days.
  • Companies will have to barred or remove any sexual act.
  • As soon as the Originator of any unlawful content will be identified he/she will be considered to be anti-national.
  • Social media companies have to set up a grievance redressal mechanism for users/victims.
  • Earlier, if anyone wants to take down any content of social media. He/she has to lodge an F.I.R to Cyber Security Cell and only after then, the content will be taken down. But now, if any individual wants to take any content down that defame or slander him in any way. Can directly address to grievance redressal mechanism of that particular social media and his request will be solved.
  • The social media intermediaries have to do due diligence and if the due diligence is not followed then Safe Harbor Provisions will not apply to them. The safe harbor provisions have been defined under Section 79 of the IT act and protect social media intermediaries by giving them immunity from legal prosecution for any content posted on the platforms [iv]

Why WhatsApp has Sued the Government of India?

Facebook-owned WhatsApp has filed a case in Delhi High Court against the government of India, seeking to block the new Information Technology rules that came into effect on 25 May 2021. According to them, the new rule requires certain social media intermediaries like WhatsApp to trace the origin of the particular message. Also, WhatsApp claimed that requiring the message to ‘trace’ is at par with keeping a fingerprint on every single message sent through their messenger. Which would violate end-to-end encryption[v] offered by them. In which they encrypt every message and call in such a way that even WhatsApp cannot track any messages or the originator of it. WhatsApp in its case also highlighted that ending the encryption mechanism will be unconstitutional and against the people’s fundamental right (Right to Privacy) under case Justice K S Puttaswamy vs Union of India[vi]. 

What Government has to say About These Allegations

On 29th May, the minister of electronics and information and technology[vii] has clarified the stance of traceability of messages on various social media platforms that have emerged as a lightning rod in the ongoing tussle over the new IT rules. He has given various statements:

  • Social media intermediaries such as WhatsApp will be required to disclose the origin of the particular message only in severe cases to help the government of India to prevent and investigate the various event that will be a threat to national security.
  • India is ensuring the right to privacy to every citizen but at the same time, it is also the responsibility of the government to maintain law and order and to ensure national security.
  • The entire debate on whether the WhatsApp encryption would be maintained or not. he said the right to privacy is ensured via encryption mechanism or by other technology but the right to privacy should be maintained. He also said social media intermediaries to find a technical solution to make both ways happen.

Conclusion

The IT Rules 2021, have the potential to fundamentally change how the internet is used by billions of users across India. Many of the changes are the same as the draft named as Chinese model of online surveillance and censorship but there is also some noticeable improvement that has been taken without public deliberation. In some aspects, it becomes a worse and unconstitutional proposed extension of executive power to regulate online news media and video streaming platforms. The need for regulation is maybe constitutional and advances fundamental rights but this approach has the potential of chilling the voices and hurting the privacy of Indian people.[viii]

[i] https://www.drishtiias.com/daily-updates/daily-news-analysis/new-it-rules-2021

[ii] https://blog.ipleaders.in/impact-it-rules-2021-live-streaming-content-social-media/amp/

[iii] https://community.nasscom.in/communities/policy-advocacy/policy-brief-the-information-technology-intermediary-guidelines-and-digital-media-ethics-code-rules-2021.html

[iv]https://www.meity.gov.in/writereaddata/files/Intermediary_Guidelines_and_Digital_Media_Ethics_Code_Rules-2021.pdf

[v] https://indianexpress.com/article/technology/tech-news-technology/whatsapp-moves-delhi-high-court-over-traceability-clause-social-media-rules-7330558/

[vi] (2017) 10 SCC 1

[vii] https://www.thehindu.com/news/national/union-minister-ravi-shankar-prasad-interview-with-the-hindu/article34743824.ece

[viii] https://thewire.in/tech/explainer-how-the-new-it-rules-take-away-our-digital-rights

Latest Posts

Archives

Mercy Petition: Boon or Bane

Posted on

This article is written by Vishrut Gupta, a law student from Lloyd Law College. The article aims to explain to the readers about the Mercy Petition which acts as a lifeguard provision for a guilty person.

Introduction

According to the Cambridge dictionary, ‘mercy’ literally means- the act of forgiving someone more specifically when you have some authority. But, as the word enters the periphery of the legal world, it carries a different meaning altogether. When the punishment of a convict is remitted, it is done through a ‘mercy petition’. A mercy petition is an application filed by an accused or a convicted person to the president of the supreme authority requesting to remit/ reduce the death sentence. It is done usually in the case where a miscarriage of justice or suspicious conviction is done. This concept of mercy petition is followed in many countries such as India, the US, UK, Canada, etc. Different countries have distinct authorities to cater this mercy petition as per the provisions of their constitution but mostly it is addressed to the president of a country. In the US and India, mercy petitions are subject to the discretion of the president. If the whole sentence is canceled, it is known as ‘pardon’ and if it is remitted partly after or before sentence, it is known as ‘clemency’ or ‘mercy’.

Legal Provisions

Article 21 of the constitution of India ensures that no person will be deprived of his right to life. Mercy petition following article 21 and article 14, which talks about the right to equality, clearly has some essence of the human sentiments and protects the basic human rights of every prisoner where the convictions are suspicious. Article 72 of the Constitution says that the President shall have the power to grant pardons and reprieves of punishment or to suspend, remit or commute the sentence of any person convicted of any offence. Similar power is given to the governors under Article 161 of the Constitution. The duration taken by the executive for disposal of mercy petition depends on the nature of the case and the gravity of the crime. It also depends upon the number of mercy petitions submitted to the court. The court, therefore, cannot set a time limit for disposal of even for mercy petitions. But, recently the Home Ministry has brought some essential changes in the laws on the mercy petition.

When Can a Mercy Petition be Filed? 

Mercy petition is the penultimate step for a prisoner. A convicted person cannot directly file a mercy petition. There are several other provisions to provide justice and if they don’t work, the person opts for the last option i.e. the mercy petition. The procedure and the steps involved before filing a mercy petition are:

  • A punishment is usually given by a trial court and if there is a suspicion in the conviction or miscarriage of justice is observed, an appeal can directly be filed in the High Court seeking justice.
  • If High Court does not entertain and dismisses the plea, the convicted person can file a review petition directly in the Supreme Court to seek remission in the sentence. If he faces another rejection, a curative petition helps.
  • Curative petition was first introduced in the case of Rupa Ashok Hurra vs. Ashok Hurra and Anr. (2002). It works on the Latin maxim- “actus curiae neminem gravity” meaning that the court shall not be prejudice in its actions. The main objective is to prevent the abuse of power in due process and eliminating the miscarriage of justice. It is supported by Article 137 mentioned in the constitution of India.
  • If the curative petition also fails, the last resort of mercy petition opts which might help the convict or prisoner. 

Layers Through Which the Mercy Petition Passes

The petition is filed and submitted by the prisoner or his relative to the governor or president depending upon the case. It is then received by the Secretariat of the President. The Secretariat sends it further to the Ministry of Home Affairs for their recommendation. The Home Ministry discusses it with the concerned state and checks the details such as the background of the criminal and the gravity of the crime. The Ministry after consulting with the state prepares a report with suggestions and sends it back to the President. The President after going through everything grants the pardon/remission or dismisses the plea depending upon the facts and need of the situation. This is a very time taking process and sometimes it takes years.

Powers of President

  • Pardon: To cancel the whole sentence and conviction of the prisoner.
  • Remission: The nature of the sentence remains the same with the reduction in the punishment like decreasing the number of years of rigorous punishment.
  • Respite: Certain special situations lead to the change in the punishment such as critical health issues to the prisoner.
  • Reprive: The execution is delayed for some time to provide the guilty person the time to prove his innocence.
  • Commute: The nature of the punishment is changed to decrease the harshness of punishment like converting the rigorous sentence into simple.

Shabnam v. State of UP Classic Case

Shabnam, a postgraduate and holding the post of the government school teacher, along with Saleem, killed all the 7 members of her family including a 10 months-old infant. She was sentenced to death by the Amroha Court which was upheld by Allahabad High Court in 2013 and also the Supreme Court in 2015. While in jail, she gave birth to a child. She filed two mercy petitions citing the reason as for the care of her child, first to the then-governor Ram Naik and then president Pranab Mukherjee but both the petitions were rejected. It was being argued that the convict has the Right to Life under the provisions of Article 21 but the judge dismissed the plea by saying that the family members also had the same rights. The apex court laid down the following observations:

  • The accused must be provided with prior notice and the accused along with its lawyer must be present during the proceedings of the case.
  • The death warrant of the convict must prescribe the exact date and time of the execution instead of a range of dates.
  • There must be a reasonable gap between the date of issuing the warrant and the execution date of the sentence so that the convict gets a reasonable time to seek legal remedies and meet his family. 
  • The convict should be given a copy of the warrant.
  • Legal aid must be given to the convict during these proceedings. 

Mercy Petition: Boon or Bane

Mercy petitions are essentially required everywhere because it is one of those few provisions which ensure the convict a second chance and the right to live which is not only a fundamental right under article 21 of the Indian Constitution but also a human right that cannot be denied. It is acting as a boon in the judicial skeleton. It helps in eliminating the situation where the ignorance of the judiciary results in injustice to the convict leading him to go through trauma and ill-health. In cases where the miscarriage of justice is seen, a mercy petition cures the damage done. Sometimes, it is also said that the mercy plea after crossing several chains lands in the periphery of politics, and recommendations by the ministry are not genuine and the best for the prisoner thereby failing the purpose of the mercy. Time is another crucial aspect in the mercy petition’s disposal. But at the same time, the procedural discrepancies result to delay injustice. This can be seen in the Nirbhaya case where the convicts were hanged after 7 years. So, we can say that the mercy petition acts as both a boon and bane. There is an urgent need to formulate laws specifying the time limit to dispose of with the mercy petitions for quick justice because- “Justice delayed is justice denied”

Latest Posts

Archives