SC Reopens Death Sentence of Child Rape-Murder Convict Vasanta Sampat Dupare

Dupare, convicted for the rape and murder of a four-year-old girl, had approached the Court under Article 32 seeking reconsideration of mitigating factors despite his death sentence having attained finality.

The Bench of Justice Vikram Nath, Justice Sanjay Karol and Justice Sandeep Mehta held that Article 32 empowered the Court to intervene in capital sentencing where the guidelines mandated in Manoj were not complied with.

“The corrective power under Article 32 is invoked to ensure that a person is not deprived of his fundamental right to equal treatment by being denied the rigorous safeguards required at the sentencing stage,” the Court observed.

At the same time, the Bench cautioned that the extraordinary jurisdiction under Article 32 could not become a routine avenue to reopen concluded matters. It stressed that such intervention would be limited to cases involving grave breaches of procedural safeguards, where non-compliance would otherwise undermine the accused’s right to life.

"We have however a word of caution. Article 32 is bedrock of constitutional remedies, but it's special scope can't be permitted to become a routine for reopening concluded matters. Reopening will be reserved to only those cases where there is breach of new procedural safeguards, as if breaches are so serious that if left uncorrected they would undermine the accused's basic rights to life," the Bench said.

Setting aside its earlier order dated May 3 that confirmed Dupare’s death sentence, the Court remitted the matter for a fresh hearing confined to sentencing. The Registry has been directed to place the case before the Chief Justice of India for assignment to an appropriate Bench.

"The sentence awarded by this Court on 3rd May is set aside and the matter is remitted to this Court for a fresh hearing on sentence alone to conducted in conformity with Manoj Supra. The Registry is directed to place the matter before CJI for assignment to an appropriate bench," the Court said.

In March this year, the Apex Court had agreed to examine Dupare's writ petition. 

Dupare’s conviction and death sentence were upheld by the apex court in November 2014. His review petition was dismissed on May 3, 2017, with the Court terming the crime one of “extreme depravity”. He had subsequently filed mercy petitions before the Governor and the President, which were rejected in 2022 and 2023.

Appearing for Dupare, Senior Advocate Gopal Sankaranarayanan had argued that the Court must examine whether its 2022 judgment, which mandated consideration of mitigating circumstances by trial courts before awarding capital punishment, should extend to his case.

Opposing the plea, the Advocate General (AG) for Maharashtra contended that Dupare could not invoke Article 32 to reopen a matter that had attained finality, and that he ought to have pursued a review petition instead.

Justice Vikram Nath, heading the Bench had observed: “It is a dangerous proposition that after any judgment or a matter which is closed can be opened up under Article 32.” The Bench had asked whether it would not be more appropriate for the petitioner to move an application in the concluded proceedings themselves.

When Sankaranarayanan cited two 2014 writ-based rulings in death row matters, Justice Karol had pressed further: “In view of the submissions of the Advocate General, are our hands not tied under Article 32?” The Bench had suggested that the petitioner consider filing a review petition for the issue to be examined.