Supreme Court commutes death penalty of Sundarrajan who murdered 7-year-old boy

The Supreme Court on Tuesday commuted the death sentence awarded to Sundarrajan who was found guilty of kidnapping and murdering a 7-year-old boy in 2009 [Sundar @ Sundarrajan vs State Rep by Inspector of Police]..A bench of Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud and Justices Hima Kohli and PS Narasimha upheld the conviction but set aside the death penalty and commuted it to 20 years imprisonment. "Applicant is a convict on death row. Petition to have a re-look at his conviction on the basis of Mohd Arif Judgment where it was held review must be held in open court. We see no reason in doubting the guilt of the petitioner. Exercising powers under review to interfere with conviction is not warranted. We commute the death sentence to imprisonment of 20 years," the Court ordered.Pertinently, the Court also directed initiation of contempt of court proceedings against a Cuddalore police officer for filing an incorrect affidavit before the Court."Notice to the Police officer Cuddalore as to why action should not be taken in pursuance to the affidavit filed in court. Registry directed to initiate a suo motu contempt case against the officer," the Court directed.The judgment was passed in a review petition preferred by Sundarrajan against the top court's 2013 verdict which had upheld the death sentence..Interestingly, the Supreme Court had on March 20, 2013 dismissed the review petitions. That order was subsequently recalled in 2018 after the top court's judgment in Mohd. Arif @Ashfaq Vs. The Registrar, Supreme Court of India mandated that all review petitions involving death penalty should be heard in open court. .The top court in the instant case noted that no exercise to look into the mitigating circumstances of the death-row convict had taken place before awarding the sentence."The duty of the court to enquire into mitigating circumstances as well as to foreclose the possibility of reformation and rehabilitation before imposing the death penalty has been highlighted in multiple judgments of this Court. Despite this, in the present case, no such enquiry was conducted and the grievous nature of the crime was the only factor that was considered while awarding the death penalty.".Advocate Renjith B Marar appeared for the convict.Read more about the judgment here.[Read Judgment]