Death Sentence
- The execution of a person sentenced to death after being found guilty by a court of law of a criminal offence is known as the capital punishment, commonly known as the death penalty. It is the harshest punishment a defendant can receive. It is typically given in the most heinous situations of murder, rape, treachery, etc.
- The most appropriate punishment and best deterrent for the worst offences is considered to be the death penalty. But those who disagree with it think it’s cruel. As a result, the morality of the death penalty is questionable, and many criminologists and socialists around the world have long called for its abolishment.
Arguments for the death penalty include:
- People should receive what they deserve in proportion to the seriousness of their crimes, according to one of the fundamental tenets of retribution.
- According to this reasoning, true justice necessitates that wrongdoers endure pain and suffering that is commensurate to the offence.
- Every criminal should receive the punishment they deserve for their actions, and a murderer should be executed.
- Deterrence: The justification for the death penalty is sometimes based on the idea that by putting convicted murderers to death, we will stop future murderers from killing people.
- The death sentence is frequently defended as giving victims’ families closure.
- There are numerous instances of people who were sentenced to death using the opportunity before their execution to confess their sins, show regret, and frequently undergo deep spiritual rehabilitation.
- Thomas Aquinas observed that by consenting to death as a penalty, the criminal was able to atone for his sinful actions and therefore avoid punishment in the afterlife. That the death sentence can result in some types of rehabilitation is shown by this.
Objections to the Death Penalty:
- The statistical data does not support the effectiveness of deterrence.
- Due to a mental disorder or physical disability, some of the people who were executed would not have been able to be discouraged.
- In some cases, those who commit capital crimes are so distraught that they fail to consider the potential repercussions.
- Since 2013 (Section 376A of the IPC), the death penalty has been authorised in rape cases. Despite this, rapes continue to occur, and in fact, their brutality has multiplied. This makes it necessary to consider whether the death sentence is a powerful deterrence to crime.
- The innocent are put to death: The most prevalent defence against the death penalty is that, sooner or later, innocent individuals may perish as a result of errors or weaknesses in the legal system.
- The risk of putting the innocent to death will always exist as long as human justice is subject to flaws, claims Amnesty International.
- People who reject the death penalty believe that punishment is evil and is simply a refined form of vengeance.
- In the majority of civilised nations, the use of death as a form of punishment has been abolished.
- “Approximately 170 States have abolished or established a moratorium on the death penalty either in law or in practise, or have suspended executions for more than 10 years,” according to the UN Secretary General’s report on the death penalty submitted to the Human Rights Council.
- The death penalty does not allow the prisoner to be rehabilitated and integrated back into society.
Indian context of the death penalty:
- Before the Criminal Procedure (Amendment) Act (Cr PC) of 1955, life in jail was an anomaly rather than the rule in India.
- In addition, the courts had to justify any lesser punishment than the death penalty for capital offences.
- Following the 1955 amendment, judges might choose to sentence someone to death or life in prison.
- According to Section 354 (3) of the Cr PC, 1973, courts must provide written justifications for assigning the maximum penalty.
- In cases involving capital offences, the death penalty is now an exception rather than the rule.
- In addition, India still uses the death sentence despite a UN global prohibition against it.
- According to India, letting offenders responsible for purposeful, cold-blooded, deliberate, and horrific killings to get away with a less sentence will undermine the law’s efficacy and produce a mockery of justice.
- In agreement with this, the Law Commission’s 35th report from 1967 rejected a proposal to abolish the death sentence.
- According to official figures, 720 persons have been put to death in India since it gained independence in 1947, which is a tiny percentage of those who received the death penalty from the trial courts.
- The sentence of death was typically commuted to life in prison, while some cases resulted in acquittals by the higher courts.
The death penalty and the Supreme Court:
- In the 1973 case of Jagmohan Singh v. State of Uttar Pradesh, the Supreme Court determined that Article 21 permits the taking of life if done in accordance with the legal process.
- Thus, under Art. 21, the death sentence imposed following a trial conducted in compliance with the Indian Evidence Act and the Criminal Procedure Code is not illegal.
- In the 1979 decision of Rajendra Prasad v. State of Uttar Pradesh, the Supreme Court ruled that a criminal’s enjoyment of their basic rights may be legitimately suppressed if their deadly activity endangers social security in a persistent, deliberate, and dangerous way.
- In the 1980 case of Bachan Singh v. the State of Punjab, a Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court issued the “rarest of rare instances” dicta, which states that the death sentence should only be applied in “the rarest of rare circumstances” when all other options have unquestionably been exhausted.
- In the 1983 decision of Machhi Singh v. State of Punjab, the Supreme Court established a list of criteria to determine whether a case qualifies as one of the rarest of rare cases or not.
The rarest of cases:
- when the murder is carried out in a way that is particularly gruesome, absurd, diabolical, repugnant, or abhorrent in order to arouse the community’s intense and extreme wrath.
- when a murder is committed for reasons of utter depravity and cruelty.
Conclusion:
- When the punishment is administered immediately after the offence, deterrence is most effective. The further the legal system separates the penalty from the crime—either in terms of time or certainty—the less likely it is that it will serve as a deterrence.
- The excessive delay in carrying out the death penalty has diminished the impact of the punishment. India is currently waiting for the execution of Nirbhaya’s rapists. Because of this, a sizable portion of the population praised the Hyderabad police encounter in Disha’s case.
- To increase public confidence in our legal system, it is necessary to speed investigations conducted by a police force that is well-trained, well-equipped, and supported by fast-track trials.
