SC: SARFAESI Act Was Not Applicable in Nagaland Before its 2021 Adoption, Dismisses Creditor’s Plea || SC: Lis Pendens Applies To Money Suits on Mortgaged Property, Including Ex Parte Proceedings || Kerala HC: Civil Courts Cannot Grant Injunctions in NCLT Matters and Such Orders Can Be Set Aside || Bombay High Court: Technical Breaks to Temporary Employees Cannot Deny Maternity Leave Benefits || NCLAT: Appellate Jurisdiction Limited to Orders Deciding Parties’ Rights, Not Procedural Directions || NCLAT: Personal Guarantors Involved In NCLT Proceedings Can Appeal Against Insolvency Admission || Supreme Court: Foreign Companies’ Head Office Expenses in India are Capped under Section 44C || SC Directs Trial Courts to Systematically Catalogue Witnesses and Evidence in Criminal Judgments || SC Calls For Sensitising Future Generations on Equality in Marriage to Combat Dowry Practices || SC: Separate Suits Against Confirmed Auction Sales are Barred; Remedy Available under Sec 47

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 :