High courts upheld only 8 per cent of death sentences; SC confirms none in recent years: Report
New Delhi (PTI): Highlighting that a high acquittal rate of death row convicts by the Supreme Court and high courts demonstrates a pattern of "erroneous or unjustified convictions", a study of 10 years of death penalty data has revealed that the top court did not confirm any death sentences in recent years.
The study by Square Circle Clinic, a criminal laws advocacy group with the NALSAR University of Law in Hyderabad, found that an overwhelming majority of death sentences imposed by trial courts did not withstand scrutiny at higher judicial levels. Acquittals far outnumbered confirmations at both the high courts and Supreme Court levels.
According to the report, the trial courts across India awarded 1,310 death sentences in 822 cases between 2016 and 2025. High courts considered 842 of these sentences in confirmation proceedings but upheld only 70 or 8.31 per cent.
In contrast, 258 death sentences (30.64 per cent) resulted in acquittals. The study noted that the acquittal rate at the high court level was nearly four times the confirmation rate.
Data showed that of the 70 death sentences confirmed by high courts, the Supreme Court decided 38 and did not uphold a single one. The apex court has confirmed no death sentences between 2023 and 2025.
"Wrongful or erroneous or unjustified convictions, then, are not random or freak accidents in the Indian criminal justice system. The data indicates they are a persistent and serious systemic concern," the report said.
Over the last decade, high courts adjudicated 1,085 death sentences in 647 cases, confirming only 106 (9.77 per cent). During this period, 326 persons in 191 cases, were acquitted.
The report attributed low confirmation rates to the appellate judiciary’s concerns regarding failures in due process. "This coincides with increased Supreme Court scrutiny of safeguards at the sentencing stage," the report said.
Of the 153 death sentences decided by the apex court over the last decade, the accused were acquitted in 38 cases. In 2025 alone, high courts overturned death sentences into acquittals in 22 out of 85 cases (over 25 per cent). The same year, Supreme Court acquitted accused persons in more than half of the death penalty cases it decided (10 out of 19), the report said.
The study highlighted that 364 persons who were ultimately acquitted "should not even have been convicted and unjustifiably suffered the trauma of death row". It added that such failures extend beyond adjudication and reflect serious lapses in investigation and prosecution.
The question of remedies for wrongful convictions remains pending before the Supreme Court. In September 2025, three persons acquitted by the apex court filed writ petitions seeking compensation from the state and argued that their wrongful convictions violated their fundamental right to life and liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution.
"In 2022, the Supreme Court crystallised a sentencing process in Manoj v. State of Madhya Pradesh , and mandated all courts to follow those guidelines before imposing or confirming a death sentence," the report read.
In 2025, the apex court held in Vasanta Sampat Dupare v. Union of India that death penalty sentencing hearings form part of the right to a fair trial and stressed that capital punishment can be imposed only after a constitutionally compliant sentencing process.
"However, even at the high courts whether the process mandated under Manoj is being complied with is in doubt,” the report said.
Let the Truth be known. If you read VB and like VB, please be a VB Supporter and Help us deliver the Truth to one and all.
'His health is not good': SC asks Centre to review Sonam Wangchuk's detention
New Delhi (PTI): The Supreme Court on Wednesday asked the Centre if there was any possibility for the government to relook at the detention of climate activist Sonam Wangchuk considering his health condition.
A bench of Justices Aravind Kumar and P B Varale observed that Wangchuk's health report was not good and asked Additional Solicitor General K M Nataraj, appearing for the Centre, to seek instructions in the matter.
"Apart from submissions, counter submissions and law points, just give a thought to it, as an officer of the Court. The detention order is passed on September 26, 2025, nearly five months.
"Considering the health condition of the detainee... The report which we saw earlier, it shows that his health is not that good. There are certain age-related, may be otherwise. Is there a possibility for the government to rethink, or even relook? the bench observed orally.
Nataraj said that he would put the suggestion to the concerned authorities.
During the hearing, the additional solicitor general submitted that Wangchuk was responsible for violence in Leh last year in which four people died and 161 were injured.
"It was ultimately, his provocative speech, provocation, instigation. The person need not actively participate, the propensity of person to influence a group of persons...that is more than sufficient," Nataraj said.
The law officer contended that order of Wangchuk's detention was approved on October 3, 2025, and there is no challenge to the approval order.
The arguments remained inconclusive and are set to continue on Thursday.
On Tuesday, the Centre and the Union Territory of Ladakh administration had told the apex court that Wangchuk was detained for instigating people in a border area where regional sensitivity is involved.
Justifying Wangchuk's detention, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta had told the bench that all procedural safeguards were followed while ordering his detention under the National Security Act (NSA).
On Monday, the Centre had said that Wangchuk tried to instigate Gen Z for protests like in Nepal and Bangladesh.
Mehta had said that Wangchuk even referred to Arab Spring-like agitation which has led to the overthrow of multiple governments in countries of the Arab world.
The top court was hearing a plea filed by Gitanjali J Angmo, the wife of Wangchuk, against his detention under the stringent NSA.
The NSA empowers the Centre and states to detain individuals to prevent them from acting in a manner "prejudicial to the defence of India". The maximum detention period is 12 months, though it can be revoked earlier.
On January 29, Wangchuk, who is under detention in the Jodhpur Central Jail, denied allegations that he made a statement to overthrow the government like the 'Arab Spring', emphasising that he has the democratic right to criticise and protest.
Senior advocate Kapil Sibal, appearing for Angmo, submitted that police have relied on "borrowed material" and selective videos to mislead the detaining authority.
Angmo claims the detention is illegal and an arbitrary exercise violating his fundamental rights.
Wangchuk was detained on September 26 last year, two days after violent protests demanding statehood and Sixth Schedule status for Ladakh left four people dead in the Union Territory. The government accused him of inciting the violence.
The plea said it is wholly "preposterous" that Wangchuk would suddenly be targeted after more than three decades of being recognised at the state, national and international levels for his contributions to grassroots education, innovation and environmental conservation in Ladakh and across India.
Angmo said the unfortunate events of violence in Leh on September 24 last year cannot be attributed to the actions or statements of Wangchuk in any manner.
Wangchuk himself condemned the violence through his social media handles and categorically said violence would lead to the failure of Ladakh's "tapasya" and peaceful pursuit of five years, Angmo said, adding it was the saddest day of his life.
