LANDMARK CASE

Mohd. Arif v. Registrar, Supreme Court of India

(2014) 9 SCC 737 · Supreme Court of India · Criminal procedure

At a glance

Citation: (2014) 9 SCC 737
Court: Supreme Court of India
Area of law: Criminal procedure
In one line: Yes, before a bench of three judges, with limited oral hearing.

1 Facts

Death row convicts sought open court hearings of their review petitions.

2 Issue

Should review petitions in death cases be heard in open court?

3 What the court decided

Yes, before a bench of three judges, with limited oral hearing.

4 Why it matters

Adds fairness in death penalty cases.

5 Think about it

Why are death cases treated differently?

6 Analyse it yourself

Read the full judgment from an official source or a law database, then brief it in seven steps: facts, issues, arguments, decision, ratio, obiter and significance. Always check the citation before you rely on it.

7 More cases on Criminal procedure

Arnab Manoranjan Goswami v. Union of India (2020) 14 SCC 12
Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar (2014) 8 SCC 273
D.K. Basu v. State of West Bengal (1997) 1 SCC 416
Gian Singh v. State of Punjab (2012) 10 SCC 303
Gideon v. Wainwright 372 U.S. 335 (1963)
Gurbaksh Singh Sibbia v. State of Punjab (1980) 2 SCC 565

All 366 landmark cases · Today's Case of the Day · Weekly quiz

← Mohd. Ajmal Amir Kasab v. State of Maharashtra Mohd. Hanif Quareshi v. State of Bihar →

A short teaching summary for students. Educational content only, not legal advice.