MP High Court: Women Retain Reservation Benefits After Marriage if Caste is Recognized in Both States || Allahabad HC: Police Must Prosecute Informants of False Firs, and IOs May Face Contempt if They Fail || MP HP: Over-Age Candidate Cannot Claim Age Relaxation Due to Delay in Earlier Recruitment || Kerala HC: Petrol Pump Licence is Automatically Cancelled on Lease Expiry Without Any Hearing || MP HC: Trial Courts Cannot Grant Permanent Injunction in Title Suits Without Recovery of Possession || MP High Court: Guardians Can be Liable For Minors Flying Kites With Chinese Manjha || SC: Under Order XXI Rule 102 CPC, A Transferee Pendente Lite Cannot Obstruct Execution of a Decree || SC: RTE Act promotes fraternity and equality by children of judges and vendors studying together || MP High Court: Aadhaar and Voter ID Cards are Not Definitive Proof of Date of Birth || Chhattisgarh HC: Second Marriage During Subsisting First Marriage Void Unless Custom Permits It

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 :