<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2012 (11) TMI 1335 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=456740</link>
    <description>The SC converted the Appellants&#039; death penalty, confirmed by the HC, to life imprisonment, emphasizing the need for consistent application of aggravating and mitigating circumstances. The Court highlighted the legislative shift requiring special reasons for the death penalty, underscoring the &quot;rarest of rare&quot; doctrine and the necessity of considering both crime and criminal in sentencing.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 20 Nov 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 12 Aug 2024 11:48:26 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=763842" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2012 (11) TMI 1335 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=456740</link>
      <description>The SC converted the Appellants&#039; death penalty, confirmed by the HC, to life imprisonment, emphasizing the need for consistent application of aggravating and mitigating circumstances. The Court highlighted the legislative shift requiring special reasons for the death penalty, underscoring the &quot;rarest of rare&quot; doctrine and the necessity of considering both crime and criminal in sentencing.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 20 Nov 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=456740</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>