Analysis Of Yakub Memon
Procedural Irregularities
Apart from the wrong application of ‘rarest of rare case’ doctrine, the hanging of Yakub Memon reeks of vengeance with glaring procedural irregularities. In PUDR v. Union of India (January 2015), the Court held that the death warrant proceedings are supposed to take place only after a convict has exhausted all legal remedies available to him. The court also laid down the following guidelines for the execution of death warrant: Sufficient notice of the proceedings of the issuance of death warrant must be given to the convict; the death warrant must specify the exact date and time for execution so as to not leave the convict in a state of uncertainty; there must be a reasonable period gap between the date of the order on the execution warrant and …show more content…
The hanging of Yakub Memon is an example of a situation where a person was sentenced to death due the deep sediments of resentment, suspicion and frustration among the citizens.
There are constitutional safeguards that allow death row prisoners; regardless of the offence they may have committed, to exhaust all legal remedies. Still, Yakub Memon was denied the opportunity to exercise his legal options. This was done in the specific context of keeping in mind the views and beliefs of the nation as a whole.
In such a situation, it becomes difficult for the judges and the officials in power to be free of any prejudice and bias is bound to creep in. This is exactly what happened in case of Yakub Memon. Even though the Courts repeatedly recognized his constitutional right to seek various remedies, he was kept away from realizing the same in several instances. This violated the principles of natural justice, which guaranteed him a fair hearing without any prejudice. Ultimately, he paid a huge due for this by being denied the right to
Apart from the wrong application of ‘rarest of rare case’ doctrine, the hanging of Yakub Memon reeks of vengeance with glaring procedural irregularities. In PUDR v. Union of India (January 2015), the Court held that the death warrant proceedings are supposed to take place only after a convict has exhausted all legal remedies available to him. The court also laid down the following guidelines for the execution of death warrant: Sufficient notice of the proceedings of the issuance of death warrant must be given to the convict; the death warrant must specify the exact date and time for execution so as to not leave the convict in a state of uncertainty; there must be a reasonable period gap between the date of the order on the execution warrant and …show more content…
The hanging of Yakub Memon is an example of a situation where a person was sentenced to death due the deep sediments of resentment, suspicion and frustration among the citizens.
There are constitutional safeguards that allow death row prisoners; regardless of the offence they may have committed, to exhaust all legal remedies. Still, Yakub Memon was denied the opportunity to exercise his legal options. This was done in the specific context of keeping in mind the views and beliefs of the nation as a whole.
In such a situation, it becomes difficult for the judges and the officials in power to be free of any prejudice and bias is bound to creep in. This is exactly what happened in case of Yakub Memon. Even though the Courts repeatedly recognized his constitutional right to seek various remedies, he was kept away from realizing the same in several instances. This violated the principles of natural justice, which guaranteed him a fair hearing without any prejudice. Ultimately, he paid a huge due for this by being denied the right to