Skip to main content

Capital Punishment In India

 Capital Punishment In India

Capital punishment is a lawful death penalty that can be imposed by a court against a person who has committed the most terrible and horrific crimes possible. Hanging is the method of execution used in criminal prosecutions. Despite the fact that it is only provided in the most extreme of circumstances in India. Indian Penal Code and Code of Criminal Procedure both provide for the imposition of the death penalty in certain circumstances. Capital punishment has existed in India since its inception, albeit its application has become increasingly limited over time. As an indication of how limited the situation is, no female offender has been sentenced to death in India since independence in 1947.

These are only a few of the offences for which the death penalty is applied in the country of India.

There is also a procedure for the execution of the death penalty, which includes the following steps: After the conclusion of the proceedings in the trial court, the judge pronounces the judgement under Section 235 of the Criminal Procedure Code, and the court must record the special reason for the judgement.

Following that, the matter will be sent to the high court for the purpose of obtaining evidence of the judgement. The high court can uphold the judgement, or it can issue a fresh judgement in the case, or it can order a new trial in the matter.

When the proof for the penalty is presented to the high court, a special leave petition may be filed as well.

A petition for review of a judgement or order passed by the Supreme Court may be brought before the Supreme Court pursuant to Article 137 of the Constitution within thirty days of the date of a similar judgement or order.

Following the dismissal of a special leave petition, the Supreme Court may enable a curative petition to be filed in order to examine its decision.

Lastly, Articles 72 and 161 of the Indian Constitution confer authority on the President of India and the Governor of the state, respectively, to grant pardons and to suspend, remit, or commute judgements in specific circumstances. The President or the governor may take the convict's case into consideration and may decide to commute the death sentence.

Here are a few examples of instances involving the death penalty:

Bachan Singh vs. the Government of Punjab

This case may be considered a corner judgement by a five-judge Bench of the Supreme Court of the United States. By establishing the rarest of the rare concept in this case, the Supreme Court highlighted certain significant constraints on the prosecution's ability to proceed. According to the Supreme Court, a genuine and persistent concern for the quality of mortal life presupposes opposition to the taking of a life through the legal system. That should only be done in the rarest or most rare cases where the choice opinion is obviously foreclosed, and even then only in extreme cases.


Mukesh and others vs. the National Capital Territory of Delhi

After rejecting the prisoners' appeal and stating that they had perpetrated a brutal crime that had damaged society's confidence, the Supreme Court maintained the death sentence for the four individuals who had been prosecuted in connection with the murder on May 5, 2017. The family of the victim, as well as members of civic society, were pleased with the outcome of the trial.

In the case of Shabnam v. State of Uttar Pradesh,

In this case, history will be made, as Shabnam will be the first woman to be sentenced to death in the country's history, following independence from Britain.

Shabnam and Saleem, both in their twenties at the time of the killings, were found guilty of the murders of seven members of Shabnam's family. She would have been the single heir to the family estate if all of them had died and she had been left alone. They were taken into custody five days later. Shabnam was 7 weeks pregnant at the time of the incident. She gave birth to her son, Mohammad Taj, in December of that same year. He is currently sharing a residence with Usman Saifi, a member of Shabnam's council, and his female companion.


In 2010, the Amroha Sessions Court sentenced them to death, a decision that was affirmed by the Allahabad High Court the following year.

It was observed in 2015 by the Supreme Court that the ultimate goal of the Court is to serve society, and that the convict's nice deed or kind heart should not be used as a justification for swapping his or her sentence. It is not acceptable to ignore the crime. Consequently, the Court maintained the death sentence on the grounds that it was a premeditated crime with meticulous planning on the part of the defendant.


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

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

Case Laws related to Defamation in favour of ClaimantCase Laws related to Defamation in favour of Claimant. TOLLEY Vs, J.S FRY & SONS LTD – (1931) Facts The defendants were owners of chocolate manufacturing company. They advertised their products with a caricature of the claimant, who was a prominent amateur golfer, showing him with the defendants’ chocolate in his pocket while playing golf. The advertisement compared the excellence of the chocolate to the excellence of the claimant’s drive. The claimant did not consent to or knew about the advertisement. Issue The claimant alleged that the advertisement suggested that he agreed to his portrait being used for commercial purposes and for financial gain. He further claimed that the use of his image made him look like someone who prostituted his reputation for advertising purposes and was thus unworthy of his status. At trial, several golfers gave evidence to the effect that if an amateur sold himself for advertisement, he no longer maintained his amateur status and might be asked to resign from his respective club. Furthermore, there was evidence that the possible adverse effects of the caricature on the claimant’s reputation were brought to the defendants’ attention. The trial judge found that the caricature could have a defamatory meaning. The jury then found in favor of the claimant. Held The House of Lords held that in the circumstances of this case – as explained by the facts – the caricature was capable of constituting defamation. In other words, the publication could have the meaning alleged by the claimant. The Lords also ordered a new trial limited to the assessment of damages. NEWSTEAD V LANDON EXPRESS NEWSPAPER LTD, (1939) Facts: A newspaper published a defamatory article about Harold Newstead. However, another person with this name brought an action in libel. He claimed that the article had been misunderstood as leading to him. The defendant newspaper recognised that they published the article. Also, they denied that they had the intention of being defamatory of him. Consequently, the claimant argued that the newspaper was under a duty. The duty was to give a clear and complete description of the correct person. Moreover, the claimant argued that the defendants were in breach of the duty. Issues: The issue in Newstead v London Express Newspaper, was if the reasonable persons would have understood the words complained of to refer to the plaintiff. Held: The Court of Appeal stated that in accordance with the current law on libel, liability for libel does not depend on the intention of the defamer; but on the fact of the defamation. Accordingly, a reasonable man, in this case a newspaper publisher, must be aware of the possibility of individuals with the same name and must assume that the words published will be read by a reasonable man with reasonable care.

  Case Laws related to Defamation in favour of Claimant.  TOLLEY  Vs,  J.S FRY & SONS LTD – (1931) Facts The defendants were owners of chocolate manufacturing company. They advertised their products with a caricature of the claimant, who was a prominent amateur golfer, showing him with the defendants’ chocolate in his pocket while playing golf. The advertisement compared the excellence of the chocolate to the excellence of the claimant’s drive. The claimant did not consent to or knew about the advertisement.   Issue The claimant alleged that the advertisement suggested that he agreed to his portrait being used for commercial purposes and for financial gain. He further claimed that the use of his image made him look like someone who prostituted his reputation for advertising purposes and was thus unworthy of his status. At trial, several golfers gave evidence to the effect that if an amateur sold himself for advertisement, he no longer maintained his amateur status and might be aske

Rules as to delivery of goods

                             Rules as to delivery of goods Section 2(2) of Sale of Goods Act defines ‘delivery’ as a ‘voluntary transfer of possession from one person to another.’ Thus, if the transfer of goods is not voluntary and is taken by theft, by fraud, or by force, then there is no ‘delivery. Moreover, the ‘delivery’ should have the effect of putting the goods in possession of the buyer. The essence of the delivery is a voluntary transfer of possession of goods from one person to another. There is no delivery of goods where they are obtained at pistol point or theft. 1. Mode of Delivery: According to Section 33, delivery of goods sold may be made by doing anything which the parties agree shall be treated as delivery or which has the effect of putting the goods in the possession of the buyer or of any person authorized to hold them on his behalf. Delivery of goods may be actual, symbolic or constructive. 2. Expenses of Delivery: According to Section 36(5), unless otherwise agree