SC to hear afresh review petition in Dharmapuri bus burning case

September 03, 2014 11:09 am | Updated November 28, 2021 09:24 pm IST - NEW DELHI:

The bus that was set on fire in February 2000 near Dharmapuri resulting in the death of three women students. File Photo

The bus that was set on fire in February 2000 near Dharmapuri resulting in the death of three women students. File Photo

In a majority judgment, a Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court on Tuesday ordered a fresh hearing of the review petition filed by three death row convicts in the case of the 2000 Dharmapuri bus burning, in which three college girls were killed.

Their petition was one of the writ petitions on which the Bench held that the convicts seeking a review would be given a “limited oral hearing” by a three-judge Bench.

The petitions had challenged the constitutional validity of the judges hearing and dismissing review petitions by “circulation” — in chambers — rather than in open court, with the convict allowed to make oral arguments. The 4:1 verdict, penned by Justice Rohinton Fali Nariman for the Bench led by Chief Justice R.M. Lodha, said the petition by Nedunchezhian, Ravindran and Muniappan should be heard “as soon as possible” by a three-judge Bench as it had been pending since 2010.

The Bench said a “maximum” of 30 minutes should be given to counsel for the convicts.

The case relates to the death of Kokilavani, Gayathri and Hemalatha of the Tamil Nadu Agricultural University, Coimbatore, when the bus in which they were travelling along with 44 other students and two teachers were torched by the convicts on February 2, 2000, after the conviction of AIADMK general secretary Jayalalithaa in a criminal case. In January 2011, the Supreme Court stayed the sentence.

In the same judgment, the Bench decided not to re-open the proceedings in the case of Pakistani national Mohammed Arif alias Ashfaq, sentenced to death for the 2000 Red Fort attack, which killed three armymen.

It said a curative petition filed by the convict was dismissed on January 23 this year. The court rejected the convict’s arguments that he had spent over 13 years in jail, suffering a double punishment of life and death sentences.

0 / 0
Sign in to unlock member-only benefits!
  • Access 10 free stories every month
  • Save stories to read later
  • Access to comment on every story
  • Sign-up/manage your newsletter subscriptions with a single click
  • Get notified by email for early access to discounts & offers on our products
Sign in

Comments

Comments have to be in English, and in full sentences. They cannot be abusive or personal. Please abide by our community guidelines for posting your comments.

We have migrated to a new commenting platform. If you are already a registered user of The Hindu and logged in, you may continue to engage with our articles. If you do not have an account please register and login to post comments. Users can access their older comments by logging into their accounts on Vuukle.