LANDMARK CASE

Triveniben v. State of Gujarat

(1989) 1 SCC 678 · Supreme Court of India · Criminal law

At a glance

Citation: (1989) 1 SCC 678
Court: Supreme Court of India
Area of law: Criminal law
In one line: Yes. Undue delay in deciding mercy can be a ground, though no fixed period applies.

1 Facts

Death row prisoners argued delays in execution were cruel.

2 Issue

Does delay after sentence justify commutation?

3 What the court decided

Yes. Undue delay in deciding mercy can be a ground, though no fixed period applies.

4 Why it matters

Basis for Shatrughan Chauhan.

5 Think about it

What delays count?

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 law

Abhayanand Mishra v. State of Bihar AIR 1961 SC 1698
Amish Devgan v. Union of India (2021) 1 SCC 1
Bachan Singh v. State of Punjab (1980) 2 SCC 684
Balwant Singh v. State of Punjab (1995) 3 SCC 214
Barendra Kumar Ghosh v. Emperor AIR 1925 PC 1
Basdev v. State of PEPSU AIR 1956 SC 488

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

← TRF Ltd. v. Energo Engineering Projects Tukaram v. State of Maharashtra (Mathura case) →

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