https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=302939 Article 134(1)(c) confers a discretionary certificate only where the case raises a substantial question of law or principle, or an error of fundamental character; it is not a device for further reappreciation of evidence on facts. Where a third Judge had already resolved the High Court divergence and no surviving factual issue required Supreme Court review, the certificate was incompetent and special leave was refused. On sentence, mere passage of time or judicial disagreement does not justify commutation of death to life imprisonment; the extreme penalty is reduced only when the proved facts make it inappropriate. On the facts here, the death sentence was maintained. en-us Tue, 19 Jan 1965 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 24 Jun 2022 13:19:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=302939 Article 134(1)(c) confers a discretionary certificate only where the case raises a substantial question of law or principle, or an error of fundamental character; it is not a device for further reappreciation of evidence on facts. Where a third Judge had already resolved the High Court divergence and no surviving factual issue required Supreme Court review, the certificate was incompetent and special leave was refused. On sentence, mere passage of time or judicial disagreement does not justify commutation of death to life imprisonment; the extreme penalty is reduced only when the proved facts make it inappropriate. On the facts here, the death sentence was maintained. Case-Laws Indian Laws Tue, 19 Jan 1965 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=302939