Constitutional Validity of the Death Penalty
Constitutional Validity of the Death Penalty is important to know as it clashes with article 21 of Indian constitution, that is right to life and Personal Liberty.
Introduction to death penalty
The death penalty in India has a historical and legal foundation rooted in ancient texts like the Yajnavalkya Smriti. This text mentions the death penalty as a form of punishment aimed at reorienting the criminal. The Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita outlines various crimes punishable by death, criminal conspiracy, and certain acts of terrorism and rape. The death penalty is also applied under specific acts like the POSCO Act (2012) and the Arms Act (1959).
Constitutional Validity of the Death Penalty
The Indian legal system follows the rarest of rare doctrine for applying the death penalty. This principle is established in the Machhi Singh v. State of Punjab case. This doctrine outlines factors such as the crime’s nature, motive, and the victim’s situation in determining whether the death penalty is appropriate. The Supreme Court of India has upheld the constitutionality of the death penalty in several cases, including Jagmohan Singh v. State of UP and Rajendra Prasad v. State of UP. In these judgments, the Court stated that the death penalty does not violate Article 21 of the Indian Constitution. But it needs to follow due process.
Over 750 executions have taken place in India since independence, illustrating the country’s historical commitment to capital punishment. The Supreme Court, in Dhananjoy Chatterjee v. State of West Bengal, emphasized that the severity of punishment should depend on the gravity of the crime, the criminal’s conduct, and the victim’s vulnerability, reflecting society’s demand for justice.
In murder cases
Regarding specific crimes, the death penalty for murder was debated following the 1949 execution of Nathuram Godse and Narayan Apte for the assassination of Mahatma Gandhi. While Godse’s guilt was clear, Apte’s conviction lacked sufficient evidence, highlighting concerns over the fairness of the death penalty.
In rape cases
In the case of rape, societal repercussions play a significant role in the debate. With the 2020 execution of the Nirbhaya case offenders after years of legal struggle emphasizing the application of the death penalty in heinous cases. The law mandates the death penalty for offenders in the child rape cases involving children under 12 years old, raising concerns about the “coercive” nature of the law.
Other cases
Terrorism presents another complex issue. In the 1993 Bombay Blasts case, the court sentenced Yakub Memon to death, even though he was not the mastermind of the attacks. His execution in 2015 reflected the emotional and political sentiments surrounding terrorism cases, where people often overlook mitigating factors. Similarly, the execution of Ajmal Kasab, a key figure in the 2008 Mumbai attacks, took place shortly after India rejected a UN resolution calling for a global moratorium on the death penalty. It also highlights India’s position on capital punishment.
In conclusion, while the death penalty in India remains constitutionally valid, its application continues to evoke intense debate. The rarest of rare doctrine provides guidelines, but the judicial and public discourse around the death penalty, particularly in cases involving murder, rape, and terrorism, reveals the complex and evolving nature of its contemporary status. Therefore, this article studies Constitutional Validity of the Death Penalty in India.
Stay tuned on our website as if any official information pops up then we will update you in minutes! If you want all the latest updates on time then join our student community on WhatsApp!
Choose the right career yourself by booking personal guidance from professionals on Mytagapp.com
