Article begins:
The Supreme Court of India recently commuted the death sentence of a man convicted of heinous crimes, marking a significant precedent in the discourse around capital punishment. This ruling not only reflects the ongoing debates about the morality and effectiveness of the death penalty but also highlights the evolving principles of penology that underpin India’s justice system.
The Recent Supreme Court Ruling
In a landmark ruling, the Supreme Court chose to commute a convict’s death sentence to life imprisonment, with the stipulation that there would be no “premature release or remission” before 30 years of actual imprisonment. The judges urged trial courts not to favour the death penalty simply because of the horrifying nature of the offence. They advocated balanced judgement, considering mitigating factors alongside societal impact.
The court alluded to the growth of penology – a criminology branch focusing on society’s responses to crime. They stress that preservation of human life has become a central tenant of this field, even in dealing with extreme criminal offences.
Understanding the Death Penalty
The death penalty, or capital punishment, is the highest form of punishment, administered following conviction by a court of law for extreme criminal offences. It’s typically given in cases like murder, rape, or treason. Advocates see it as a fitting retribution and an effective deterrent, while critics argue it to be inhumane and questionable from a moral perspective.
Arguments for the penalty include proportional retribution and deterrence, providing closure for victims’ families. Those against point to the ineffectiveness of deterrence and the potential of executing innocent individuals due to errors in the justice system. Crucially, they also highlight that it doesn’t rehabilitate offenders.
Death Penalty Status in India
Prior to the 1955 Criminal Procedure (Amendment) Act, the death penalty was common in India, with the courts required to explain any lighter sentencing. Post-amendment, court discretion grew, making life sentences more prevalent.
Despite a United Nations moratorium on the death penalty, India maintains it. The country’s stand is that leniency for heinous crimes undermines law effectiveness leading to a travesty of justice. Proposals to scrap capital punishment have been consistently rejected, as reported by the Law Commission. Since 1947, official statistics show 720 executions in India, with most death sentences commuted to life imprisonment or seeing acquittal at higher courts.
The Supreme Court’s Previous Rulings
In the 1973 case, Jagmohan Singh v. State of UP, the Supreme Court sanctioned deprivation of life under Article 21, provided it followed legally established procedures. Later judgements expanded this stance. In Bachan Singh v. State of Punjab (1980), “rarest of rare cases” doctrine was propounded, stipulating the death penalty only when no alternative remained. In Machhi Singh v. State of Punjab (1983), the court provided guidelines to determine such rare cases.
Way Forward in Such Cases
Addressing crimes against women and children requires broader societal reforms, robust governance measures, and enhanced investigative and reporting mechanisms. Rather than enhancing punishments, focus should be on fostering societal change and strengthening our legal systems.