SC affirms life term for murder convict, urges Governor to consider pardon
A bench of Justices MM Sundresh and Aravind Kumar, while affirming the conviction and sentence awarded by the Karnataka High Court to advocate Shubha Shankarnarayan (42) and her three co-accused, delved deep into the sociological underpinnings of criminality and appealed for compassion, transformation and community responsibility.
'Society, through its own systemic failures, inequalities, or neglect often plays a role in shaping criminal behavior,' the bench said, adding that the responsibility of reintegrating and rehabilitating such offenders must also be borne by the society that may have contributed to their alienation.
Shubha, daughter of a prominent Bangalore-based lawyer, was engaged to software engineer BV Girish on November 30, 2003. Four days later, on December 3, she asked Girish to take her out for dinner and then insisted on stopping at a spot on the Indiranagar-Koramangala Intermediate Ring Road to watch airplanes land. There, Girish was attacked and murdered by Arun Verma, Shubha's alleged boyfriend and two of his accomplices.
All four were convicted by the trial court and sentenced to life imprisonment in 2010. After the high court affirmed their conviction, they had moved the Supreme Court assailing the verdict, which the top court dismissed on Monday. The bench held that the evidence on record was sufficient and endorsed the concurrent findings of the lower courts.
Even as it upheld the conviction, the top court refused to end its intervention at a purely punitive level. Citing 161 of the Constitution that vests the power of pardon in the governor, it urged that a broader view of justice be taken in light of the passage of time and subsequent conduct of the convicts.
'The appellants, who committed the offence with adrenaline pumping in their veins, have now reached middle age… They were not born as criminals, but it was an error of judgment through a dangerous adventure,' said the court, adding that none of the four had attracted any adverse conduct reports from jail authorities since their conviction.
Accordingly, the court granted the convicts eight weeks to file appropriate petitions seeking pardon under Article 161. It directed that they shall not be arrested and their sentence shall remain suspended until the governor has considered their mercy plea.
The 132-page judgment delved into the possible causes of crime, particularly when it arises from emotional rebellion, systemic inequity and gendered oppression.
Describing the internal turmoil of Shubha, it noted: 'The voice of a young ambitious girl, muffled by a forced family decision, created the fiercest of turmoil in her mind… backed by an unholy alliance of a mental rebellion and wild romanticism, (it) led to the tragic murder of an innocent young man.'
Crime, Justice Sundresh wrote, must be seen not merely as an individual's deviance but as an outcome of multiple interlinked social and psychological factors.
'A crime constitutes a mental rebellion of norms and rules…triggered by causes which are both distant and immediate…The offender becomes a victim, requiring adequate measures for treatment by compassionate correction, structural support, and opportunities for genuine transformation,' said the bench, highlighting the need to move beyond retributive justice.
Importantly, the court made a special mention of the gendered dimensions of criminal behaviour and societal control.
Referring to the predicament of a young woman forced into an unwanted marriage and denied autonomy, the court observed: 'An unwarranted marriage thrust upon her is the worst form of alienation that she can experience both mentally and physically… A forced marriage, divorcing her from her professional ambitions and curtailing her further education, would certainly warrant a reaction. Such reactions would vary from one woman to another, depending upon the circumstances.'
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Hindu
24 minutes ago
- The Hindu
Declare Lodhi-era 'Gumti of Shaikh Ali' protected monument: Supreme Court to Delhi government
The Supreme Court on Wednesday (July 16, 2025) directed the Delhi government to issue a fresh notification to declare the Lodhi-era monument "Gumti of Shaikh Ali" a protected monument under law. The dispute over the monument came to limelight when the top court directed the Defence Colony resident welfare association to vacate its structures and pay ₹40 lakh to the archaeology department of the Delhi government as compensation for occupying the historical place since the 1960s. A bench comprising Justices Sudhanshu Dhulia and Ahsanuddin Amanullah was hearing a plea filed by Defence Colony resident Rajeev Suri, who sought to have the Gumti declared a protected monument under the Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Sites and Remains Act, 1958 (AMASR Act). The plea was filed in the top court after the Delhi High Court dismissed his plea in 2019. The top court has been regularly passing directions to ensure the removal of encroachments, illegal occupation, and beautification of the monument and its surrounding area. On Wednesday (July 16, 2025), the bench examined a Delhi government notification and said it was not 'happily worded'. 'Let the notification (to declare the monument as a protected one under the law) be re-issued by the Delhi government,' the bench said. Protected monuments under the AMASR Act benefit from legal protection, conservation efforts, and restrictions on activities around them to ensure their preservation for future generations. Such monuments are safeguarded against damage, destruction, and unauthorized construction or excavation in their vicinity. The bench asked the authorities to demolish the illegal structures inside the monument area. The bench also asked the court commissioner to inspect the area and apprise the bench about the work undertaken in pursuance of the directions issued. It asked the authorities, including the archaeology department, to make and execute plans to beautify and preserve the monument and its surrounding areas. The bench previously directed the MCD and others to remove all encroachments around "Gumti of Shaikh Ali". It also ordered the MCD and DJB to vacate and hand over their office spaces to the Land and Development Office. The bench subsequently reprimanded the MCD for continuing to operate an office near the monument and granted 48 hours to it to clear the site of 'lock, stock, and barrel'.
Indian Express
24 minutes ago
- Indian Express
Power outage in NEET-UG 2025: SC to hear plea demanding retest for affected aspirants in MP
The Supreme Court on Wednesday agreed to hear a plea against an order refusing to direct a retest in NEET-UG 2025 for candidates aggrieved by power outage at some centres in Madhya Pradesh. A bench of Justices Surya Kant and Joymalya Bagchi would hear the plea next week after the counsel sought an urgent listing on the ground that counselling was scheduled to start from July 21. The bench noted there were several rounds of counselling and students could appear in them, if they succeeded in the case. Read | 'We understand the students' plight, but…': MP High Court reserves verdict on NTA's appeal against NEET UG retest The petitioners are candidates who appeared in the examination and suffered a power outage in certain centres in Madhya Pradesh and have moved against the decision of the Madhya Pradesh High Court refusing re-examination. A single judge of the high court directed the National Testing Agency to conduct retest of the NEET-UG-2025 examination for candidates affected by a power outage at certain centres in Indore and Ujjain of the state. The division bench of the high court, however, set aside the single judge order on the plea of the National Testing Agency but cautioned against any recurrence in future. It took note of an expert panel report opining that though there was power outage at some centres, there was natural light to enable candidates to write the test
News18
an hour ago
- News18
Prisoners With Disability Have Enforceable Rights To Dignity, Rehabilitation & Accommodation: SC
The Supreme Court held that denial of reasonable accommodations in custody violates Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution and breaches the RPwD Act, 2016 The Supreme Court has delivered a landmark judgment affirming the constitutional and statutory rights of prisoners with disabilities, declaring that the State is duty-bound to ensure their dignity, humane treatment, and equal access to rehabilitation. A bench of Justices J.B. Pardiwala and R. Mahadevan held that disabled inmates must not be relegated to the margins of the justice system merely because of their incarceration, and that reasonable accommodations in prison are not a matter of charity but a constitutional and legal obligation. 'The punishment lies only in the restriction of liberty, not in the denial of humane treatment or reasonable accommodations," the bench said. 'Lawful incarceration does not suspend the right to human dignity." The judgment came in a plea by advocate L. Muruganatham, who suffers from Becker Muscular Dystrophy, a degenerative condition resulting in 80% locomotor disability. He challenged the Madras High Court's order enhancing his compensation from ₹1 lakh to ₹5 lakh after he faced systemic neglect during a wrongful period of incarceration. The Court, while refusing to enhance the compensation further, acknowledged broader issues of systemic inaccessibility and neglect faced by prisoners with disabilities and issued time-bound, binding directions for prison reforms across Tamil Nadu. These, it held, stem not only from India's constitutional ethos but also from the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (RPwD) Act, 2016, and Article 15 of the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (UNCRPD), to which India is a signatory. The bench said that denial of access, medical treatment, interpreters, assistive devices, or accessible formats within custodial settings cannot be brushed aside as mere administrative gaps. They amount to violations of Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution. 'Such systemic omissions lead to indirect discrimination," the Court said, especially when a prisoner's ability to participate in their own defence is hindered due to inaccessible procedures. The absence of interpreters, proper communication support, or assistive technology, it said, can result in miscommunication, delays in justice, and denial of fair hearing. The Court expressed deep concern that there is no existing policy framework, unlike the minimal protections afforded to women prisoners, to protect the rights of disabled inmates or members of the transgender community. The appellant had submitted that his physical condition had worsened in custody due to the lack of protein-rich food, assistive devices, and proper healthcare. The Court noted that while he did not receive certain specific facilities, records show that he remained in the prison hospital and was given some special amenities. The failure to provide particular food items or advanced interventions, the bench said, stemmed from 'institutional limitations" rather than malice. Importantly, the Court clarified that Article 21 does not extend to personalised or luxurious food preferences, but mandates 'adequate, nutritious and medically appropriate food." What matters is whether the State fulfilled its obligation to safeguard the prisoner's basic health and dignity. Recognising the structural neglect of disabled inmates, the Court framed 15 actionable directives aimed at transforming custodial spaces into inclusive, rights-compliant environments. These include: Mandatory identification of prisoners with disabilities at the time of admission. Accessible prison infrastructure with ramps, modified toilets, wheelchair paths, and sensory-safe spaces. Dedicated physiotherapy and psychotherapy spaces in every prison. Access audits to be completed within six months by expert committees. Compliance with RPwD Act provisions, Harmonised Guidelines (2021), and related prison rules. Provision of healthcare services, including regular physiotherapy, psychiatric services, and assistive devices. Sensitisation of prison and medical staff to recognise and support disabling conditions without bias. A medically appropriate diet for all prisoners with disabilities, tailored to individual needs. Lifesaving therapies and urgent interventions, either on-site or linked to government hospitals. Mandatory training for prison officials on disability rights and reasonable accommodation duties. Review of the State Prison Manual within six months to align with RPwD and UNCRPD standards. Regular consultation with disability rights groups to frame inclusive prison policies. Monitoring committee to inspect and report on prison conditions every three months. Maintenance of disability-disaggregated data to track needs, services, and accommodations. Comprehensive compliance report to be filed before the State Human Rights Commission by the Director General of Prisons within three months. While the Court upheld the Madras High Court's ₹5 lakh compensation order as 'just and reasonable," it made it clear that the broader issue lies in institutional failure. 'A systemic transformation is urgently required, one grounded in compassion, accountability, and a firm constitutional commitment to dignity and equality," the bench declared. About the Author Sanya Talwar Sanya Talwar, Editor at Lawbeat, has been heading the organisation since its inception. After practising in courts for over four years, she discovered her affinity for legal journalism. She has worked More Get breaking news, in-depth analysis, and expert perspectives on everything from politics to crime and society. Stay informed with the latest India news only on News18. Download the News18 App to stay updated! view comments Location : New Delhi, India, India First Published: July 16, 2025, 17:30 IST News india Prisoners With Disability Have Enforceable Rights To Dignity, Rehabilitation & Accommodation: SC Disclaimer: Comments reflect users' views, not News18's. Please keep discussions respectful and constructive. Abusive, defamatory, or illegal comments will be removed. News18 may disable any comment at its discretion. By posting, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
