In Brief
Two death-row inmates challenged their death sentences through review petitions after being granted leave to reopen them following a Constitution Bench judgment. They argued that tape-recorded evidence lacked proper Section 65B certification, that their conviction should be downgraded from murder to culpable homicide not amounting to murder based on autopsy findings, and that their fingerprint evidence had been misread in the original judgment. A three-judge bench held that review jurisdiction in criminal cases is strictly limited to patent errors apparent on the face of the record, not mere re-argumentation of already-considered points. The court found no such error: the tape was primary evidence requiring no certification, the conviction was based on cogent ocular evidence, fingerprint evidence was correctly stated, and death penalty was properly imposed under the 'rarest of the rare' test. Review petitions dismissed.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.