Skip to main content


                              DEATH PENALTY IN INDIA 


720 prisoners have been executed in India since 1947. In independent India, the assassins of Mahatma Gandhi Nathuram Godse and Narain D Apte were the first to be hanged to death (the two were hanged in Ambala Central jail in Haryana on November, 1949). The latest execution in India was on March 20, 2020 the four convicts of the Nirbaya gang rape case. In 1980, the Supreme Court said that death penalty should only be rewarded only in rarest of rare cases. In India the execution can be given by two ways, hanging by the neck until death and by being shot to death. Death by shooting is executed under the Army Act, Navy Act and Air Force Act. Death penalty is one of the punishment prescribed under section 53 of IPC. Death sentence is given in serious and heinous offences. 


1)Jagmohan Singh vs. State of UP (1973) – it is the first case where the constitutionality of death penalty was challenged on the ground of violation of Article 14, 19 and 21 of the constitution. In this case a five judged bench of the supreme court upheld the constitutional validity of death penalty and also held that capital punishment is not violative of Article 14, 19 and 21 of the constitution.

2)Bachan Singh vs. State of Punjab(1980) – in this case again the constitutionality of death penalty was challenged, but  this time it is under two specific grounds, the first one is that death penalty as a punishment for murder under section 302 of IPC was challenged and the second one is the procedure of sentencing death penalty. In this case the court upheld he decision which is given in Jagmohan Singh case. In this case court made a new doctrine that is doctrine of rarest of rare, the supreme court held that the death penalty only be constitutional when it is applied to exceptional penalty in the rarest of rare cases.

3)Macchi Singh vs. State of Punjab(1983) – this case strengthen the doctrine of rarest of rare and also in this case main three points are given to better understanding ,they are:

(i) To avoid death penalty court have to take care of two consideration, they are the factor of culpability (gravity and circumstances of the offence) and the circumstances of the offenders (socio-economic circumstances and other circumstances of the offender). 

(ii) Life imprisonment is the rule and Death punishment is an exception. Death penalty should only be given in exceptional case.

(iii) Court has to prepare a balance sheet of aggravating and mitigating circumstances. Only when aggravating circumstances outweigh the mitigating circumstances only then death penalty can be awarded.

4) Mithu Singh vs. State of Punjab – in this case section 303 of the IPC was declared unconstitutional. S.303 of the IPC was struck down as violative of Article 21 and 14 of the Constitution of India, as the offence under the section was punishable only with capital punishment and did not give the judiciary the power to exercise its discretion and thus result in an unfair, unjust and unreasonable procedure depriving a person of his life.


If one person is awarded death penalty he also have many remedies available, they are if the death penalty is given in lower court then they can approach the High Court(under section 366(1) of crpc), then also the court held the decision of lower court correct then they can give appeal in the supreme court, then also it is rejected then they can give review petition( if there is any new evidence), then also it rejected then they can file curative petition, the last hope will be the mercy petition( according to Article 72 for the  president and Article 161 of the constitution for state governor give the power of mercy petition). In Shabnam vs. Union of India, shabnam is awarded death penalty (she and his boyfriend killed her entire family), the mercy petition was filed to the president but it was rejected.


Asha Sebastian.



Popular posts from this blog

60 Minute Marriage Counselling Session On Phone

Description A 60 minute phone call with an expert Marriage\Relationship Counselor to discuss your marriage\relationship related issues. Counselling aims to resolve issues and improve communication in a relationship. Couples’ counselling works with both people in the relationship, however sessions can start with one individual, working towards the involvement of the other partner. What's Included a) 60 minute phone call with the counselor where you can discuss all your issues and seek guidance. What's Not Included a) Counselling session via meeting

INCOME TAX SECTION 32AD - Investment in new plant or machinery in notified backward areas in certain States

 Description (1) Where an assessee, sets up an undertaking or enterprise for manufacture or production of any article or thing, on or after the 1st day of April, 2015 in any backward area notified by the Central Government in this behalf, in the State of Andhra Pradesh or in the State of Bihar or in the State of Telangana or in the State of West Bengal, and acquires and installs any new asset for the purposes of the said undertaking or enterprise during the period beginning on the 1st day of April, 2015 and ending before the 1st day of April, 2020 in the said backward area, then, there shall be allowed a deduction of a sum equal to fifteen per cent of the actual cost of such new asset for the assessment year relevant to the previous year in which such new asset is installed. (2) If any new asset acquired and installed by the assessee is sold or otherwise transferred, except in connection with the amalgamation or demerger or re-organisation of business referred to in clause (xiii)or cla

Section 58B of The Advocates Act - Special provision relating to certain disciplinary proceedings

 Section 58B The Advocates Act Description (1) As from the 1st day of September, 1963, every proceeding in respect of any disciplinary matter in relation to an existing advocate of a High Court shall, save as provided in the first proviso to sub-section (2), be disposed of by the State Bar Council in relation to that High Court, as if the existing advocate had been enrolled as an advocate on its roll. (2) If immediately before the said date, there is any proceeding in respect of any disciplinary matter in relation to an existing advocate pending before any High Court under the Indian Bar Councils Act, 1926 (38 of 1926), such proceeding shall stand transferred to the State Bar Council in relation to that High Court, as if it were a proceeding pending before the corresponding Bar Council under clause (c) of sub-section (1) of section 56: Provided that where in respect of any such proceeding the High Court has received the finding of a Tribunal constituted under section 11 of the Indian B