Death Penalty & Right to Life in India | UPDATED 2024

INTRODUCTION

Fundamental rights, usually referred to as inalienable or basic rights, are absolute rights that, in the event of a violation, are made actionable against the state. However, the State may set some limitations on these rights. A fundamental right that is protected in practically every country in the world is the right to life. One of the fundamental tenets of human existence is the right to a free, abundant, and dignified life.

Everyone has the right to live their life as they see fit, free from unjustifiable interference from others. Only a democracy that guarantees its inhabitants the right to defend their own life and liberty can be successful.

The death penalty debate is the most socially significant issue now given the circumstances brought about by the twenty-first century. The death penalty is an essential component of the criminal justice system in India. The human rights movement is becoming more prominent, and some people are beginning to question whether it is moral to even have the death penalty.

While life in prison is often the highest sentence, the death penalty is permitted in other nations. Distinct nations have different laws. Many academics are highly opposed to it because they believe it violates the fundamental right to life. Every human being has the right to life and the right to be free from cruel, inhumane, or humiliating treatment, according to several human rights organizations. They claim that the planned execution of a prisoner for punishment and deterrent is an unnecessary use of resources.

No matter how serious the convict’s crime, this cruelty cannot be excused. Given that the right to life is a fundamental human right, the imposition of the death sentence is a violation of that right. Everyone who is affected by the cruelties of the death penalty loses some of their humanity. However, there are also many who vehemently disagree, claiming that the death penalty does not violate the right to life. They argue that the right to life is not absolute and that the death sentence should be viewed as a punishment applied in accordance with the legal process created to restrict the right to life while taking into account the welfare of the society.

RESEARCH QUESTION

1. Could it be that using the death penalty as a deterrent for crime doesn’t work?
2. Why is the death penalty only used in the “rarest of rare” cases?

METHODOLOGY FOR ASSESSMENT OF CO-RELATION BETWEEN DEATH PENALTY & RIGHT TO LIFE

The non-empirical type of research is the methodology used in this study. The secondary sources are the places where the data was gathered. Case laws are referred to in secondary sources, which are also used to gather information. Additionally, information is gathered from print and electronic sources like internet databases and different search engines. The researcher proposes to critically assess the study’s subject and strives to accomplish the study’s main objectives using the data and material they have gathered.

The historical, analytical, critical, statistical, and comparative components of this research process are equally important. The planned study would mostly use comparative and historical research approaches. One of the most fundamental human rights, as well as a natural right with a lengthy history, is the right to life and personal liberty. The study project aims to comprehend the development of the state historically and the development of rights, especially the “Right to Life.” Additionally, Article 21 has a long history in India, dating back more than 60 years.

The study of Article 21’s evolution over the years will be done as part of the research project. Regardless of political ideology, everyone has the right to life and personal freedom. This is a universally recognized human right. The study will compare the “Right to Life and Personal Liberty” in terms of its availability (degree and nature) and how it is understood in various states. The study will provide a critical analysis of the scope and substance of Article 21 in India, including how accessible the “Right to life and personal liberty” is under Article 21 of the Indian Constitution and what it stands for.

LITERATURE REVIEW

However, India and America have preserved the death penalty and recommend exceptional crime and specific grounds as to why it should be applied. Some nations, like Britain and Germany, are against the death penalty and have abolished it. A death sentence is the taking away of someone’s life, which is protected by Article 21 of the Indian Constitution. In the most exceptional of exceptional cases and for reasons, the Supreme Court upheld the legitimacy of the death penalty. Only white-collar offenders who committed antisocial offences and against hardened criminals might get the death penalty.

In Bachan Singh v. State of Punjab, Justice Bhagwati ruled that the death penalty was unconstitutional and in violation of Articles 14, 19, and 21 of the Indian Constitution. It is harsh and inhumane. There is no statutory policy and the death penalty is arbitrarily applied. According to Justice Bhagwati, the extension of the death sentence violates articles 14, 19, and 21 of the Indian Constitution and looks to be against the death penalty. Special justifications for the death penalty and the rarest of the rare types of situations have yet to be fully and precisely defined, although approximate definitions do provide a unique perspective, according to the different judges.

STATEMENT OF RESEARCH

The death sentence or death penalty is also known as a Capital Punishment in which a person is put to death by the state as a punishment for a crime which he/she has committed (right in rem – against the world at large).

The death penalty is awarded for the offenses like murder, rape, terrorism, child sexual abuse, sedition, etc. which largely affect society, fear of encroachment on their lives increases in them with the increasing crimes.

The death sentence or capital punishment is not a violation of Article 21 of the Indian Constitution, according to the Supreme Court of India. India was a staunch supporter of the death sentence and resolved to only impose it in the “rarest of rare situations.”

In the case of Bachan Singh v. State of Punjab, (1980) it was decided. Though neither the legislature nor the Supreme Court has provided an explanation of what constitutes a “rarest of rare case” or” special reasons.”

When a person is facing the death penalty, the court is the ultimate decision-maker and must decide whether to impose a death sentence or life imprisonment. Although it is never specified what procedures will be deemed fair and reasonable, we can say that the court still has ultimate control over the convict’s fate.

If the death sentence is used, the Indian Criminal Justice Administration must meet the requirements for the protection of human rights. Delay in execution is a common occurrence in our nation, and as a result, it violates Article 21 of the Indian Constitution as well as the Universal Declaration of Human Rights by violating a person’s fundamental human rights. Any punishment for a crime must be equitable, just, sufficient, reasonable, and proportionate to the offence, and it must never be excessive given the nature of the offence. When the execution is delayed, the prisoner has more anxiety while awaiting execution, which increases the severity of his punishment, which is already harsh and terrible.

OVERVIEW OF THE DEATH PENLTY AND RIGHT TO LIFE UNDER INDIAN LEGAL SYSTEM

1. The death penalty has several flaws. 60 death sentences were handed down by the Supreme Court between January 1, 2000 and June 30, 2015. It later acknowledged that it had made mistakes in 15 of them (or 25%). Can we trust this system to end a life? And even that was based on evidence that a corrupt or ineffective police force had gathered or made up? The impoverished and marginalised are unfairly targeted by the death penalty. Those without the death penalty are punished. Poor convicts receiving legal help benefit most from it, whilst those with private attorneys don’t. It is difficult to apply the death punishment equitably or logically. The Supreme Court has confirmed time and time again that this most severe penalty was unfairly imposed. 5.2 people were put to death for every 1 lakh murders. Such a choice is inescapably bizarre. It mostly depends on the adjudicator’s personal convictions. Judges who supported it handed down the death penalty; judges who opposed it never did. Presidents who supported abolition (S. Radhakrishnan and A.P. J. Abdul Kalam) did not turn down requests for mercy, while others with differing ideologies were more willing to do so. There is no deterrence impact of the death penalty. The idea that a specific number of murders are prevented by each execution has been completely debunked by social science studies. Most murders are committed in the heat of the moment, while high on drugs or alcohol, or due to mental illness, with little or no consideration for the potential repercussions of their actions. The few murderers who prepare their crimes in advance, such as professional executioners, intend and anticipate avoiding all punishment by avoiding detection. Some self-destructive people might even harbour the hope that they’ll be apprehended and put to death. 

Death penalty laws deceive the population into believing that the government is doing an effective job of preventing crime and violence. In truth, these laws offer us or our communities no defence against the actions of deadly criminals.

1. The Court typically employs its perspective to assess the seriousness and harshness of the crime committed while making decisions regarding Capital Punishment (or simply the Death Penalty). Only crimes that are incredibly bizarre, hallucinogenic, and whose conduct is a singular event in society crimes that an average person of prudent nature could never possibly imagine are subject to the death penalty. However, the Indian judiciary often does not impose the death penalty; instead, the greatest sentence it can impose is life imprisonment. If an accused criminal is found guilty of perpetrating the horrific crime, the judiciary in Independent India will sentence them to death under the “Rarest of Rare Case” theory.

1. • The main incidence of the rarest of rare nature that took place in independent India is Nathuram Godse in the case Nathuram Godse v. Crown (Assassination of Mahatma Gandhi). Mahatma Gandhi was shot and killed by Nathuram Godse on the evening of January 30, 1948, during a petition meeting at Birla Mandir in Delhi. Following a protracted trial, Justice Amarnath imposed the death penalty on him, which was unanimously upheld by the three Punjab High Court judges.

1. • In Kehar Singh v. Delhi Administration, the supreme court upheld the death penalty imposed by the trial court and upheld by the High Court on the three appellants Kehar Singh, Balbir Singh, and Satwant Singh for conspiring to kill Smt. Indira Gandhi and achieving her murder in accordance with IPC sections 302, 120B, 34, 107, and 109. The court determined that the killing was one of the very few instances in which a professional killer and his conspirators required exceptional punishment.

1. • Although Santosh Kumar Singh was charged with raping the victim and breaking every bone in her body in the shocking case of Santosh Kumar Singh v. Union Territory of Delhi (Mattoo Murder case), his actions were not yet deemed to be sufficiently brutal to qualify the case as the “rarest of rare.”

1. • In India, u/s 303 of the IPC used to make the death penalty mandatory. However, the Supreme Court ruled in Mithu Singh v. State of Punjab in 1983 that Section 303 violates the Constitution since it violates Articles 14 and 21’s right to life. Following the judicial precedent established in Bachan Singh v. State of Punjab, where the Death Penalty is regarded as a correctional retribution that is meted out in cases accounting for extreme culpability, the Hon’ble Supreme Court implemented the “Rarest of Rare Case” doctrine in the Indian Legal System. Nowhere in the legislation or any other Act is this notion referenced. There is no set legal standard by which to judge how this theory should be applied. Instead, it is the outcome of judicial precedents.

The death penalty is not wholly upheld by Indian law or fully sustained from a consistent point of view. Death Penalties are still permissible in some extremely rare circumstances, such as those described in Sections 121, 302, 364A, and any other portion of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) of 1860, while being somewhat restricted.

REPORT 

Following Bentham’s theory of penal aims, which states that the pain experienced by the criminal should be greater than the pleasure he derives from committing the crime, there is a strong need for regulated and appropriate punishment. However, this “higher” must also be uniform and proportionate; for instance, the death penalty is unfair and unjust for crimes like theft, trespassing, and extortion, as are even life sentences.

Criminologists and prosecutors are worried about and attempting to lower the crime rate in society. We must reform, correct, and make sober citizens out of the criminals who are a significant part of our society. The way society views the outcasts needs to alter as well, allowing them to have some of the same rights as regular citizens while yet being subject to fair limitations.

But we also need to consider the perspective of the victims. If victims come to understand that the government is unwilling to punish offenders in the interest of reform and correction, they may try to impose their own punishment on the offenders, which may result in anarchy.

INTERNATIONAL SCENARIO ON DEATH PENALTY & RIGHT TO LIFE

The United Nations (UN)

One of the topics that generates the most discussion worldwide is the death penalty. The UN General Assembly acknowledged the necessity for every nation to adhere to high standards of a fair trial in cases where the death penalty is used. Just, fair, and reasonable procedures must be followed. For instance, in resolution No. 15 of 1996 (23 July 1996), the UN Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC) urged member nations to abolish the death penalty and urged those that do so to guarantee offenders a prompt and impartial hearing.

No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, barbaric, or degrading treatment or punishment, according to Article 5 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which was adopted in 1948. No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment or punishment, according to Article 7 of the 1966 International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR). The Economic and Social Council again endorsed the United Nations’ suggestions made in earlier resolutions to protect the human rights of those facing the death penalty in resolution No. 50 of 1984. (26^th May ,1984). Following is a summary of them:

1. • Countries that have not yet abolished the death penalty may only apply it to the most serious crimes; 
   • Capital punishment may only be used in cases of major offences under the law already in effect. There cannot be any retroactive application of the sentence; 
   • The death penalty should not be given to juveniles who were under 16 years old at the time of the offence;
   • Pregnant women, new mothers, and people who are crazy cannot be sentenced to death;
   • Capital punishment may only be carried out after a fair trial in accordance with Article 14 of the ICCPR and where guilt is beyond a reasonable question or compelling alternative explanation;
   • Any individual who has been given the death penalty has the right to appeal to a higher court, and measures should be implemented to protect that right;
   • Anyone who has been awarded the death penalty should have the option of asking for a pardon or a sentence reduction; 
   • Capital punishment should not be carried out while an appeal, pardon, or sentence reduction action is ongoing;
   • The death penalty shall be carried out with the least amount of pain.

The European Union

During the 19^th century, thanks to the work of Professor Beccaria and other criminologists, political and economic changes, as well as initiatives from Central and Eastern Europe, the European countries almost became a region without the death penalty and recognised it as a cruel and inhumane punishment that instils psychological terror and leaves room for excessive punishment. The total abolishment of the death penalty in all circumstances during peacetime is guaranteed by the sixth protocol to the European Convention on Human Rights of 1982.

The complete elimination of the death penalty, even during times of war and under military law, was suggested by the Assembly of the Council of Europe in 1994 with additional protocol to the European Convention on Human Rights.

The People’s Republic of China executes the most people each year, however other nations (such Singapore or Iran) have greater rates of executions per person. The People’s Republic of China’s government has recently taken steps to minimise the number of offences that are officially punishable by death and to restrict the use of the death sentence. In addition, attempts to commit crimes that are not actually fully carried out, such as repeated felonies like fraud attempts, are punishable by the death penalty. It is determined that crimes should receive the death penalty based on their recidivist nature rather than on how bad they are.

Legislation in the Indian scenario: The Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) is the Public Law and substantive Criminal Law that outlines offences and imposes penalties. The IPC’s Section 53 offers the life sentence and the death penalty as substitute sentences.

The Supreme Court ruled that section 303 is unconstitutional in Mithu v. State of Punjab because it is in conflict with articles 14 and 21 of the constitution. Non-governmental organisations and the general public in India are campaigning to safeguard human rights and end inhumane, degrading, and harsh punishment. Nevertheless, the death penalty is still in use.

Although the judiciary developed the concept of “rarest of rare cases” and has indicated that it is with special reasons that the death penalty must be imposed in cases of exceptional and aggravating circumstances where offences are very grave in nature, the application of the principle itself, as evident from a multitude of cases, is in violation of Constitutional provisions.

States that have set moratoriums on death sentences and executions or have tightened restrictions on its application can also be considered as part of this global movement against the death penalty. As states adopt this global abolitionist movement, must think about how to function without the death penalty as they follow the worldwide trend towards abolition.

This research outlines the problems and effects of abolition as well as the effective strategies states have developed to administer justice equitably and assist individuals convicted of the worst crimes in preparing for the prospect of resettlement in society. This bundle will be helpful to states that still use the death penalty because many of the alternatives to execution are also used by those states.

 

BIBLIOGRAPHY

• https://www.juscorpus.com/doctrine-of-rarest-of-rare-cases-is-it-truly-rare/.
• https://www.lawinsider.in/columns/a-look-into-fundamental-rights-and-capital-punishment-in-different-countries.
• https://www.legalserviceindia.com/legal/article-4440-capital-punishment-and-human-rights-perspective-.html.
• https://portal.theedulaw.com/SingleArticle?title=whether-the-death–sentence-is-violative-of-article-21–how-the-right-to-life-and–personal-liberty-guaranteed-by-article-21-may-be-curtailed.
• https://www.aclu.org/other/death-penalty-questions-and-answers.
• https://blog.ipleaders.in/death-penalty-should-be-abolished-an-ongoing-debate/.
• Abolishing the Death Penalty:Why India should say no to Capital Punishment by Gopalkrishna Gandhi.
• Constitutional Law of India by J.N Pandey. 

 

Do you want to publish your own book?

We will help you get the best options for book publishing related services in India that helps you to self publish your book professionally. Complete set of publishing services. From designing book covers to publishing, promotion to distribution we provide them all. Click here to get free call back from our team consulting you regarding the publishing costs and the process.

Read Some of Our Other Blogs:

1. How to Protect Your Juvenile Rights in India

2. Marital Rape – An Unrecognized Crime in India

3. Unveiling the ambiguity regarding bar on ‘Anticipatory Bail’ under SC/ST (POA) Act, 1989

4. Development in interpretation of ‘sedition’ law in India