SC: Consumers Cannot Bear Power Plant Depreciation Costs When No Electricity Was Supplied || Supreme Court: Para-Teachers’ Regularisation Depends On Educational Standards Set By States || Bombay High Court: State Cannot Withhold Aid to Child Homes While Supporting Ladki Bahin Yojana || Delhi High Court: Husband Cannot Seek to Strike off Wife’s Defence over Unpaid Litigation Costs || Calcutta HC: Bank Accounts Cannot Be Frozen Solely on Complaints Filed Via MHA Cybercrime Portal || J&K&L HC: Unregistered Agreement to Sell Can be Considered For Assessing Possession at Interim Stage || Raj HC: Cybercrime Cases Can't be Quashed Only on Compromise as They Impact Society at Large || Gujarat High Court: Separate Compensation is Payable For Stillborn Child in Railway Accident Case || Delhi HC: Hymen Rupture is Not Required to Prove Penetrative Sexual Assault under the POCSO Act || Delhi HC: Organised Crime Groups Exploit Juveniles, Misuse Juvenile Justice Laws for Serious Crimes

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 :