https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=278241 Where co-accused are identically placed on the same facts and one has already obtained commutation, the Court may intervene to prevent manifest injustice from unequal treatment. The Court held that in constitutional jurisdiction, and in light of the prior rejection of the mercy petition, it was appropriate to keep the death sentence in abeyance rather than permit immediate execution. Relief was granted against execution, with a recommendation that the matter be reconsidered for commutation under Article 72 of the Constitution of India. en-us Fri, 12 Feb 1982 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 19 Jan 2019 13:08:27 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=278241 Where co-accused are identically placed on the same facts and one has already obtained commutation, the Court may intervene to prevent manifest injustice from unequal treatment. The Court held that in constitutional jurisdiction, and in light of the prior rejection of the mercy petition, it was appropriate to keep the death sentence in abeyance rather than permit immediate execution. Relief was granted against execution, with a recommendation that the matter be reconsidered for commutation under Article 72 of the Constitution of India. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 12 Feb 1982 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=278241