- In the Bachan Singh case, a Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court upheld the constitutional validity of the death penalty but ruled that it should only be imposed in the 'rarest of rare' cases. - The judgment provided guidelines for courts to follow while deciding whether to impose the death penalty, emphasizing that life imprisonment is the rule and the death sentence is an exception. - The 'rarest of rare' doctrine requires courts to consider aggravating and mitigating circumstances and conclude that the alternative sentence of life imprisonment is unquestionably foreclosed.
In which one of the following judgments of the Constitutional Bench of the Supreme Court of India, the 'rarest of rare' principle in the award of death penalty was first laid down ?
Asked in UPSC CDS 1 2016 · Topic: The Supreme Court (Landmark Judgments and Doctrines)
More Indian Polity and Governance questions
- In which one of the following cases, the Constitutional validity of the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights of Divorce) Act 1986, was upheld by the Supreme Court of India ?
- The judgement of the Supreme Court of India in the Vishakha Case pertains to
- The issue, 'whether Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code is violative of Articles 21, 14 and 15 of the Constitution of India' was decided in which one of the following cases ?
- Which of the following statements is/are true about previous Chief Justice of India, Yashwant Vishnu Chandrachud? Statement-I : He was, 16th Chief Justice of India Statement-II : Till date, he is the longest serving Chief Justice of India Statement-III : He was appointed by Neelam Sanjiva Reddy From the statements given above, which is/are true?
- Who was the Chief Justice of India for the shortest duration?
- Landmark judgments and the findings by Hon'ble courts are mentioned below. Evaluate the pairs: 1. Minerva Mills v. Union of India: The power of the Parliament to amend the Constitution is limited by the Constitution. 2. Ahmed Khan v. Shah Bano Begum: Extended Section 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code to provide maintenance to a divorced Muslim woman. 3. Shreya Singhal v. Union of India: The Hon'ble Supreme Court of India struck down Section 66A of the Information Technology Act (IT Act), which violated freedom of speech and expression, declaring it to be unconstitutional. Which of the statements given above are correct?
- The Supreme Court of India has constituted a Committee of Administrators (COA) to run the BCCI. Who among the following is not a member of COA ?
- Which of the following statement(s) is(are) correct? 1. The judgment in First Judges Case declared that the Primacy of The CJI's recommendations to the President can be refused for cogent reasons. 2. The judgment in Second Judges Case declared that "justiciability" and "primacy" required that the CJI be given the "primal" role in such appointments. 3. The judgment in Three Judges Case ruled out the concept of "primacy" of the highest judiciary over the executive.