News Highlight
The Supreme Court needs to form a uniform framework for trial judges to determine mitigating factors in death penalty cases.
Key Takeaway
- The Supreme Court on Monday referred to a Constitution Bench on the question of how to provide accused in death penalty cases a “meaningful, real and effective” hearing of their mitigating circumstances before a trial judge
- A three judge Bench led by the Chief Justice of India said the presentation of mitigating factors by an accused to avoid the “extreme penalty of death” was a “valuable right”.
Death Penalty or capital punishment.
- It is a state or judicial body’s legal sanction for killing a person convicted of a crime.
- It is a legal practice in many countries, especially against acts of heinous crimes like murder and rape.
Status of the death penalty across the world
- Countries that have abolished the death penalty:
- 108 countries have abolished the capital punishment for all crimes.
- Most recently, Chad (2020), Kazakhstan (2021), Sierra Leone (2021), and Papua New Guinea (2022) also abolished the capital punishment for all crimes.
- Retain the death penalty:
- Only 54 countries in the world retain the capital punishment, including India.
Legal backing of the death penalty in India
- Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC), 1898:
- Death was the default punishment for murder and required the concerned judges to give reasons in their judgment if they wanted to give life imprisonment instead.
- Amendment to the CrPC in 1955:
- The requirement for written reasons for not imposing the death penalty was removed.
- Section 115 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC):
- Abetment of an offence punishable with death or imprisonment for life.
- Section 118 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC):
- Concealing intent to commit an offence punishable with death or imprisonment for life.
Arguments for the Death Penalty
- Social confidence:
- The capital punishment assures the people that perpetrators of heinous crimes will be killed themselves, which instils confidence in a society that the death penalty will act as a deterrent.
- Moral correctness:
- Supporters of the death penalty believe that those who murder because they have taken the life of another have forfeited their right to life.
- Cheaper alternative:
- The act of the capital punishment is often seen as more convenient than life imprisonment, which costs the state exchequer funds for the upkeep of relatively heinous and socially condemned criminals.
- Crime-infested regions:
- In regions with high crime rates, the death penalty may aid in reducing crime when it is imposed in some instances.
- For example, due to the increase in executions, the Saudi Arabian crime rate and statistics for 2017 was 1.27, a 14.94% decline from 2015.
- Deterrent:
- The death penalty may be seen as too high a price to be paid; thus, many persons may not commit the crime for fear of their own death.
Arguments against the death penalty
- Not the goal of the justice system:
- The justice system aims at reforming convicted individuals in cases of life imprisonment, while the death penalty aims at revenge.
- Against human rights:
- It goes against the rights of a condemned man. even if he is entitled to certain fundamental human rights.
- International practice:
- Around 170 states have abolished or introduced a moratorium on the death penalty, either in law or practice or suspended executions for more than ten years. [UN Secretary General’s report on the death penalty]
- Legalised murder:
- The death penalty can widely be seen as a state-sanctioned murder. Many activists claim that no person or authority has the right to take a life.
- Misplaced conviction:
- On some accounts, people are convicted solely based on circumstantial evidence and without absolute proof of the commission of the crime. In such cases, there is a big chance of the wrong person being executed.
- For example, based on circumstantial evidence, Dhananjoy Chatterjee was a security guard executed in 2004 for the rape and murder of an 18-year-old schoolgirl in 1990.
Judicial and legal precedents
- Bachan Singh v. the State of Punjab, 1980:
- The Supreme Court refused to create categories and provided discretion to the judges to apply the moral reasoning of inflicting a death sentence in each case based on aggravating circumstances.
- Mithu v. the State of Punjab, 1983:
- It was held that Section 303 of the IPC, which deals with capital punishment, violated the rights to equality, life, and personal liberty as conferred under Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution.
- The Law Commission:
- The Law Commission (2015), headed by Justice A P Shah, proposed abolishing capital punishment in non-terrorism cases.
Way forward
- Exceptional Cases:
- Death Penalty should be reserved for only exceptional cases and must not become the norm.
- Based on hard evidence:
- Death penalties must not be based on circumstantial evidence and must be in a case where conviction is based on hard evidence.
- Social interaction:
- The regions with high rates of crime must be identified, and public sensitisation and identification of potential criminals must be made.
- Database maintenance:
- A database of repeat offenders and following their movements can also prevent the commission of crimes to a certain degree.
- Following Court Precedents:
- The principle laid down in cases like Bachan Singh or Machhi Singh has to be strictly followed so that the people convicted of similar offences are awarded the punishment of an identical degree.
Pic courtesy: Quora
Content Source: The Hindu