DRAFT CONSTITUTION 695
In showing the necessity why it is desirable in my judgment to confer appellate criminal jurisdiction upon (be Supreme Court as specified in the sub-clauses of article 111-A, I propose to separate sub-clauses (a) and (b) from sub-clause (c) because they stand on a different footing. As the House knows, (a) and (b) confine the appellate jurisdiction of the Supreme Court only to those cases where there has been a sentence of death : in no other case the Supreme Court is to have criminal appellate jurisdiction. That is the first point that bas to be borne in mind.
I shall state briefly why it is necessary to confer upon the Supreme Court this limited appellate jurisdiction in cases where there bas been a sentence of death passed upon an accused person. The House should note that so far as our criminal jurisprudence, as it is enshrined in the Criminal Procedure Code, is concerned, there is one general principle which has been accepted without question and that principle is this that where a man has been condemned to death he should have at least one right of appeal, if not more.
Mr. President : May I just point out one thing? Your amendment does not cover the case of a person whose sentence has been enhanced to a sentence of death.
The Honourable Dr. B. R. Ambedkar : We do not propose to give such a thing. That is the point. With regard to enhancement of the sentence we do not propose to confer criminal jurisdiction of an appellate nature on the Supreme Court. We do it with open eyes and I think everybody ought to know it. That is not the intention. It must be generally accepted that where a man has been condemned lo death he should have at least one right of appeal. Starting with that premise and examining the provisions of the Criminal Procedure Code it will be found that there are three cases where this principle is, so to say, violated or not carried into effect. The first case is the case where, for instance, the District Judge acting as a Sessions Judge acquits an accused person; the Government which has been invested with a right of appeal against the acquittal appeals lo the High Court, and the High Court i n its appellate jurisdiction condemns the man to death. In a case like this no appeal is provided. That is one exception to the premise.
The second case is the case of the Sessions Judge in the High Courts of Bombay, Calcutta and Madras, where sitting in a Sessions Court he acquits a criminal; then the government takes an appeal to the High Court