The “Death Penalty” or “Capital Punishment” is the harshest punishment a society or democracy can impose in order to uphold law and order. But murdering another human being in the name of justice is just as bad. We should focus on stopping the crime, not on the perpetrator.
We should amend the law to ensure law and order so that everyone can live in harmony with one another because “Life is valuable, and death is final.” According to the UN, murdering a person for the sake of justice also results in the death of humanity.
Nobody has a right to determine that who will live or who will dies, but God has the power to determine who lives and who dies.
rather of putting someone to death by hanging, we ought to use a different tactic known as the reformative technique so that the offender can change for the better and continue to live in peace.
Introduction
‘Execution of a death sentence is referred to as “execution,” while a death sentence itself is referred to as a “death sentence.””. It is the Criminals who must be punished by the state in order to keep society’s law and order. The capital punishment is the judicially ordered execution of a person who has broken a specific law.
The legal term “death penalty,” which is recognised by the government, refers to a person being put to death by the state as punishment for the crime he committed Execution of a death sentence is referred to as “execution,” while a death sentence itself is referred to as a “death sentence” Every time a court imposes a sentence, it does it in accordance with a theory or a premise.
These beliefs, which go by the name “Theories of Punishment
typically fall into one of five categories:
- The deterrent theory
- Restructuring Theory
- Theoretical Precautions
- Theoretical Retribution
- The Expiation Theory
In the United Nations (UN), where the death penalty is viewed as a violation of human rights, the phrase “Abolition of Death Penalty” is one of the most frequently discussed themes.
The Reformative Theory of Punishment was given more weight by the UN than the Deterrent Theory of Punishment.
In Rajendra Prasad v. State of Uttar Pradesh, Justice V.R. Krishna Iyer made This remark: “The specific cause must relate, not to the crime, but to the offender. Criminal not deserve the death penalty.
Acc.to ABDUL KALAM :- “Avul Pakir Jainulabdeen Abdul Kalam said, ” We are all the products of God. I’m not convinced whether a human-made mechanism is capable of ending a life based on fabricated evidence. –
The legality of the death penalty in India under Constitution
The question of the death penalty has long been divisive everywhere in the world. The death sentence is applied in India for the most serious, heinous, and egregious offenses, such as murder, war against the government, etc., according to the Indian Penal Code.
Article 21 of the Indian Constitution states that everyone has the “right to life,” which shall not be denied to anyone. The president has the power to exercise mercy when the death sentence is involved.
The President of India has the power to commute, alleviate, postpone, or otherwise alter a conviction for the death penalty under Article 72 of the Indian Constitution.
Once a person has been found guilty and sentenced to death, Article 72 of the Indian Constitution gives the President the authority to commute, relieve, postpone, or otherwise modify a death penalty conviction.
Once a defendant has been found guilty and given a death sentence so the President has power to dismiss the death penalty Once a criminal has been convicted and sentenced to death,
Case laws
Jagmohan Singh VS State of Uttar Pradesh[1]–
The Supreme Court in this case rejected the claim that the same violated Article 19 of the Indian Constitution, which protects the “right to life.”
Rajendra Prasad VS State of U.P
It was emphatically emphasised by Justice Krishna Iyer that the death sentence is against Articles 14, 19, and 21.
Bachan Singh VS State of Punjab–
One year after Rajendra Prasad v. State of U.P the same case set as a The Supreme Court reversed the ruling in the aforementioned case by vote of 4:1 by Justice Bhagwati. there was argued that the term is “public order” designed in Article-19(2) to Article-19(4) is different from “law and order” and also introduced the principle of award with death penalty in “rarest cases,” despite the facts that it violation Articles 14, 19, and 21. The Supreme Court acknowledged Article 21 as the State is authority to take someone’s life. The Delhi gangrape case, which requested the guilty be given the death penalty,
Machchi Singh VS State of Punjab–
The Supreme Court established guidelines for whether the death penalty may be applied, taking into account the crime’s gravity, victim’s type, and whether it was committed in social
anti-social manner in Capital punishment.
Kidnapping that does not result to death– “•
- Aggravated murder: According to Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, this crime carries a death sentence.[5]
- Treason – A person who attempts to overthrow the government or aids members of the armed forces in doing so may get the death penalty.
Offences related to terrorism that don’t result to death–
- Use of explosives that can cause explosion and threaten life/cause damage to property. For instance, Muhammad Afzal was hanged on February 9, 2013, in retaliation for the attack on the Indian parliament in December 2001, which saw five men carrying bombs kill nine people.
Rape that does not result to death
– Under the Criminal Law Act of 2013, a perpetrator who causes harm during a sexual assault that results in the victim’s death may be executed. As a result of the Delhi gangrape case, gang rapes are now also punishable by the death penalty. According to the 2018 Criminal Law Ordinance, anyone found guilty of raping a child younger than 12 years old faces a death sentence or a 20-year prison term as well as a fine. These revisions were made in response to the rape and murder of an eight-year-old girl in Jammu and Kashmir.
Drug trafficking that does not result to death
- – An individual who has been found guilty of drug trafficking and funding of such substances, as well as commission or attempted commission of those crimes, may get the death penalty.
Military offences that do not result to death
- – If done by a military member, aiding an assault or attempting to seduce a soldier, airman, or sailor away from their duties carries the death penalty.
Other offences that do not result in death
– The following offences are punishable by death:
- If someone participates in an illegal conspiracy to commit a capital offence
- If someone gives false testimony knowing that it can result in the conviction of a SC/ST person for committing a capital offence and it convicts an innocent person.
- If someone tries to kill someone who has been given a life sentence and the victim is hurt as a result.
Other offences resulting in death
– The death sentence is imposed under the Indian Penal Code for murder committed during an armed robbery, kidnapping of the victim for ransom if the victim dies, and involvement in organised crime if it results in death.
Shooting
The Army, Navy and Air Force Acts all provide for the execution of the death penalty. According to Section-34 of the Air Force Act of 1950, the guilty party may be shot or hanged to carry out the death sentence. Similar restrictions to those in the Air Force Act, 1950 are likewise included in the Army Act, 1950, and the Navy Act, 1957
Hanging–Mentally Disabled person
– The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973[7] specifies Section 354(5), which specifies hanging as a type of capital punishment. William Marwood in Britain came up with the procedure outlined in the same. Eight individuals have been hanged thus far in the twenty-first century, the most recent being the Nirbhaya case prisoners who were hanged to death on March 20, 2020.
The following criminals are exempt from the death penalty:
Minor
– According to Indian law, a person who committed a crime while under the age of 18 is not eligible for the death penalty..
Pregnant Woman
– A pregnant woman facing the death penalty must be granted mercy under a 2009 amendment. As an illustration, Nalini, who played a significant part in the murder of Rajiv Gandhi, had her death sentence commuted to life in prison because she was pregnant.
Conclusion
If one views it from a moral standpoint, it is wrong to take away someone’s life in the name of justice and at the same time it may result in the execution of an innocent person. However, if one views it from a social perspective, it would not only be dangerous for the various potential victims but also be wrong if a wrongdoer is not punished for the heinous crimes committed by him so the society can not enjoy his freedom and the might commit crime again so there are lot of opinion according to the thinking of people.
Written BY
Muskan Fatima
Maharshi Dayanand University