SC: Disciplinary Proceedings Cannot Follow if an Officer is Discharged on the Same Charge || SC Clarified the Distinction Between Arbitration “Seat” And “Venue” While Summarising Key Principles || Supreme Court: Wife and Her Family Cannot Be Prosecuted For Dowry-Giving Based On Her Complaint || SC: Plaint Cannot Be Rejected Under Order VII Rule 11 CPC on the Ground of Order II Rule 2 Bar || Supreme Court Has Issued an SOP Prescribing Strict Timelines For Filing Legal Aid Appeals || Madras HC: Dhurandhar 2 Release Cannot be Stalled Due to Objections From a Small Section || Delhi HC: Lokpal May Form Prima Facie Opinion Before Show Cause Notice Without Prior Hearing || Bom HC: Family Courts Cannot Casually Order a Spouse’s Medical Examination to Assess Mental Health || Bombay HC: Child Care Leave Protects Motherhood and Denial Violates Rights of Mother and Child || Supreme Court: Amalgamating Company Loss Cannot be Set Off Against Amalgamated Income

Glossip et al. v. Gross et al - (29 Jun 2015)

Use of midazolam does not violate Eighth Amendment of Constitution

Criminal

Hearing a petition against the use of midazolam by the State of Oklahoma in carrying out the death penalty, the United States Supreme Court held that the Petitioners had failed to establish that its use would create a demonstrated risk of severe pain. It added, Oklahoma did not have access to alternatives, and the Petitioners themselves had failed to suggest a more appropriate substitute. Midazolam is the first of three drugs used in carrying out executions by lethal injection. It came to be used by State authorities after previous drugs, like sodium thiopental, used to induce a state of unconsciousness in the inmate were prevented from being used in executions.

Tags : DEATH ROW EXECUTION MIDAZOLAM

Share :