THEORIES OF PUNISHMENT WITH SPECIAL REFERENCE TO CAPITAL

PUNISHMENT
Sourav Suman

One of the more difficult tasks for me as president was to decide on the issue of confirming capital
punishment awarded by courts... to my surprise... almost all cases which were pending had a social and
economic bias.

A. P. J. Abdul Kalam

ABSTRACT

Dynamism is another name for Laws because it is ever changing. In history and even in present capital
punishment or death sentence is the most debated topic because of its legal and social validity and mostly
because of its moral aspects. It is generally seen that punishments are framed for the betterment of the
society and reduce the notorious activities to its minimal. This is the responsibility of the administration
and the judiciary to maintain law and order but in some exceptional times the judiciary is faced with some
cases where the gravity of the offence is too high to be overlooked and pardoned and in those exceptional
circumstances courts have no other option than to punish the criminal in the most harsh way by taking
away his life and setting a bench mark in the society. Thus if Capital punishment is removed from the list
of punishment it will become a promoting factors for the criminals will commit more heinous crimes at a
more higher rate which will be against the nation and in past few months the amendments by the
Parliament clearly shows that Capital punishment is the need of the hour and if removed will have
devastating effect on the society.
INTRODUCTION
Every Community has its own way of controlling the society for which rules and regulations are framed
and mentioning the sanctions along with them. These sanctions are nothing but the punishments. ‘The first
thing to mention in relation to the definition of punishment is the ineffectiveness of definitional barriers
aimed to show that one or other of the proposed justifications of punishments either logically include or
logically excluded by definition.’ Punishment has the following features:

 It involves the deprivation of certain normally recognized rights, or other measures considered
unpleasant
 It is outcome of an offense
 It is applied against the creator of the offense
 It is applied by an organ of the framework that made the demonstration an offense 1

This paper focuses on the different theories of punishment, Constitutional validity of Capital
Punishment, Landmark cases related to capital punishment and various amendments in criminal laws
and the position of capital punishment in various countries.

THEORIES OF PUNISHMENT

The five modern theories are:

1. Deterrent Theory
2. Retributive Theory
3. Expiation Theory
4. Protective or Preventive Theory
5. Reformative Theory

1
Shaswata Dutta, Theories of Punishment- A Socio-Legal View, legalserviceindia, (dated 06/26/2020 visited: 10:23 pm),
http://www.legalserviceindia.com/articles/pun_theo.htm
DETERRENT THEORY
Deterrent Punishment = Severe Punishment;

Intended to prevent the offender from doing again committing the crime.

The main aim of this theory is to inflict different punishments on the guilty parties with the end goal of
discouraging them from perpetrating wrongdoing. This theory additionally looks to create a feeling of
dread in the brain of the individuals with same attitude so as to block them from carrying out such
wrongdoing. The strictness of the punishment acts as a warning to other people.

This theory faces discouragement when it comes to hardened criminals on the grounds that this theory
scarcely has any impact on them. This can be said from the way that numerous offenders come back to jail
and want to live in jail in order to carry on with an ordinary life.

The main aim of this theory is to create fear in the mind of the wrong-doers and also in the minds of those
who possess the same mentality.

According to the promoters of this theory, punishment is meant to prevent the person concerned and other
persons from committing, similar offences. Many a times this theory has also been submitted by the
advocates for the retention of capital punishment and also to support of their argument and reasoning.
They argue that capital punishment, by its very nature, cannot have either a reformative value or be a
retributive necessity. Its only value, if at all, is by way of deterrence.

However, the theory of deterrent punishment is a failure when it comes to hardened criminals because
these criminals have become accustomed to the severity of the punishment, and deterrence does not
always prevent them from committing a crime. Then again, it likewise neglects to influence a
conventional lawbreaker, as frequently, a wrongdoing is committed in a heat of excitement. In the event
that the wrongdoing is pre-intervened, the wrongdoer carries out the wrongdoing, knowing completely
well, the results emerging from his act and carries out the act since he can't resist the opportunity to do it.

This method is still largely existent in many Muslim countries.

Principle of the theory: 'a tooth for a tooth, an eye for an eye, a limb for limb and nail for a nail'.

In earlier days, legal sanctions were grounded in vengeance and retaliation which never served justice but
only revenge. Modern human philosophy condemns this cruel concept and considers it inhuman and
barbaric in nature.

RETRIBUTIVE THEORY
As per this theory, the general public acquires moral satisfaction from this discipline which can't be
disregarded. Then again, according the reformative theory if the criminals are dealt mercifully, or even
amidst extravagance and luxuries as it is happening in many prisons of the world, which are equipped with
airconditioning, private toilets, TV sets etc. Therefore the spirit of vengeance would not be satisfied, and it
might find its way through private vengeance. Therefore, punishment, instead of preventing a crime,
might indirectly promote it.

Unfortunately, the retributive theory ignores the root causes of the crime, and it does not strike at the
removal of the causes. A mere moral distress can hardly prevent crime. It is quite possible that the
criminal is also a victim of circumstances as the victim himself might have been. This theory also
overlooks the fact that two wrongs do not make a right. The theory also seems to ignore that if vengeance
is the spirit of punishment, violence will be a way of prison life.

EXPIATION THEORY
'Expiation' means 'compensation'.

So, the focus of this theory is - “to pay for the sin committed”

According to this theory, the wrongdoer has to pay compensation to the victim. The society recognizes the
right of the victim. The criminal is punished economically.

This theory makes the offender serve the victims and their dependents by compensating the deprivation.
Though the experimentation of this theory is too expensive in terms of public safety and security.

According to Victimologists, the chain of personal vengeance can be reduced in the society by awarding a
compensation to the victims from the property of the criminals. It can prevent the criminal behavior in the
society. Because it stops the chain reaction, and subsides the personal vengeance.

PROTECTIVE OR PREVENTIVE THEORY

This theory focuses on removing the criminals from the society because according to this theory
protecting the society from criminals is better that curing the minds of the criminals. This theory says that
all criminals should be imprisoned and kept them far away from the normal society without any
connection to it. Thus, the society will be protected from the criminals and will be in peace.

This is a prisoner concentrated theory which focuses on the prisoner to prevent him from repetitive
attempts of committing the crime. Offenders disabled by punishments like death, exile or forfeiture of
office and incarceration. Hence, rigorous imprisonment, capital punishment, banishment, whipping,
amputation and stoning are allowed punishments according to this theory.
REFORMATIVE THEORY
“Condemn the Sin, not the Sinner” – Mahatma Gandhi.

This theory focuses on the uses of social, economic, physical and psychological methods in order to bring
about a change in the minds of the criminals.

Reformation process has been denoted as a who is surgeon operating on a person to remove his pain. It is
an art of bringing back the corrupted and sentenced offenders to national common society, as important
residents.

As per this theory, wrongdoing resembles sickness. This theory states that "you can't cure by killing". The
examples of the reformative theory accept that a culprit remain in jail should serve to correct him and to
re-shape his character in another form. They accept that however sanctions might be serious, it should
never be corrupting. To the followers of this hypothesis, execution, isolation and disfiguring are relics of
the past and foes of transformation. Thus the main aim of the reformists is to attempt to bring a positive
change in the character of the guilty party, in order to make him a helpful citizen.

The reformists argue that if criminals are to be sent to prison in order to be transformed into law-abiding
citizens, prisons must be turned into comfortable, dwelling houses. This argument is, however, limited in
its application, and it must be remembered that in a country like India, where millions live below the
poverty line, it may even act as an encouragement to the commission of crimes.

CAPITAL PUNISHMENT

What is Death Penalty?

Capital punishment is a lawful procedure whereby an individual is killed by the state as a punishment for a
wrongdoing. There is a difference between death sentence and execution. The judicial decree that
someone be punished in this manner is a death sentence , while actually murdering of the individual is an
execution. There has been a worldwide appeal towards the cancelation of the death penalty; in any case,
India has not embraced this position. What makes this type of punishment unique in relation to the others
is the undeniable component of irreversibility attached to it. A man once executed for a wrongdoing can
never be breathed life into back. So if any mistake has sneaked in while choosing an issue, this blunder
can't be redressed at a later stage.
Position in India
In India Article 21 of the Constitution titled ‘Protection of life and personal liberty’ says:

No person shall be deprived of his life or personal liberty except as according to procedure established by
law.

This article of the Constitution enshrines the Right to Life guaranteed to every individual in India. The
constitutional validity of capital punishment has been called into question several times in the India
judiciary and this paper shall try to examine those several occasions.

The Indian Penal Code, 1860 awards death sentence as a punishment for various offences. Some of these
capital offences under the IPC are punishment for criminal conspiracy (s. 120B), murder (s. 302), waging
or attempting to wage war against the Government of India (s. 121), abetment of mutiny (s.132), dacoity
with murder (s. 396) and others. Apart from this there are provisions for death penalty in various
legislations like the NDPS Act, anti – terrorism laws etc.

DISCUSSION OF LANDMARK CASES DEALING WITH DEATH PENALTY IN

INDIA

In the case of JAGMOHAN SINGH V. STATE OF U.P

Which was the first case dealing with the question of constitutional validity of capital punishment in India.
The counsel for the appellant in this case put forward three arguments which invalidate section 302 of the
IPC. Firstly that execution takes away all the fundamental rights guaranteed under Clauses (a) to (g) of
Sub-clause (1) of Article 19 and, therefore the law with regard to capital sentence is unreasonable and not
in the interest of the general public. Secondly that the discretion invested in the Judges to impose capital
punishment is not based on any standards or policy required by the Legislature for imposing capital
punishment in preference to imprisonment for life. Thirdly, he contended, the uncontrolled and unguided
discretion in the Judges to impose capital punishment or imprisonment for life is hit by Article 14 of the
Constitution because two persons found guilty of murder on similar facts are liable to be treated
differently one forfeiting his life and the other suffering merely a sentence of life imprisonment. Lastly it
was contended that the provisions of the law do not provide a procedure for trial of factors and
circumstances crucial for making the choice between the capital penalty and imprisonment for life. The
trial under the Criminal Procedure Code is limited to the question of guilt. In the absence of any procedure
established by law in the matter of sentence, the protection given by Article 21 of the Constitution was
violated and hence for that reason also the sentence of death is unconstitutional.
After looking into the arguments the five judge bench upheld the constitutionality of death penalty and
held that deprivation of life is constitutionally permissible for being recognized as a permissible
punishment by the drafters of our Constitution.

MITHU V. STATE OF PUNJAB 

This was another case where the mandatory death sentence under Section 303 was declared
unconstitutional and hence invalid. The section was based on the logic that any criminal who has been
convicted for life and still can kill someone is too cold blooded and beyond reformation, to be allowed to
live. The judges in Mithu’s case held that Section 303 violated the Articles 14 and 21 of our Constitution
and so it was deleted from the IPC.

Capital punishment is a legal penalty in India. It has been carried out in five instances since 1995, while a
total of twenty-six executions have taken place in India since 1991, the most recent of which was in 2015.

The Supreme Court in Mithu vs. State of Punjab struck down Section 303 of the Indian Penal Code, which
provided for a mandatory death sentence for offenders serving a life sentence. The number of people
executed in India since the nation achieved Independence in 1947 is a matter of dispute; official
government statistics claim that fifty-two people had been executed since Independence. However,
research by the People's Union for Civil Liberties indicates that the actual number of executions is in fact
much higher, as they located records of 1,422 executions in the decade from 1953 to 1963 alone.

RECENT IMPORTANT CASES

SEPTEMBER 1: TRIPLE MURDER CASE (SHYAM SINGH VS. MADHYA PRADESH)

The Trial (2011)

A trial court found Shyam Singh guilty of murdering his parents and nephew, on the intervening night of
18-19 April, 2011. The court convicted the accused under Section 302 IPC and awarded death penalty,
subject to confirmation by the High Court.

High Court upholds death penalty (2012)

While upholding the death penalty of the accused and dismissing the appeal preferred by him, the high
court had observed thus: "The accused-appellant had murdered his mother, father and nephew. The
murder was cruel, brutal and it was committed in revolting manner. The accused-appellant was in a
dominating position and he was in a position of trust because, he is the son of' deceased father and mother.
The deceased could not have had imagined that the appellant would commit such type of crime. There was
no reason to commit the crime. Neither there was any provocation from the deceased persons. They had
been sleeping. In our opinion, this is a fit case where the death punishment awarded by the trial court is to
be confirmed because the appellant is so cruel that he had murdered his own father, mother and nephew.
For such type of offence, there must a deterrent punishment so the society can live peacefully. "Supreme
Court sets aside death penalty

The apex court, in its order setting aside death penalty, observed: "No doubt, the accused appellant has
been found guilty of triple murder, including the murder of' both his parents. The manner in which the
crime was committed is, indeed, brutal and cruel. The question that confronts the court is whether the
offence of triple murder and the manner of commission of crime alone would be sufficient to justify the
imposition of the death penalty. "Setting aside the death penalty which was confirmed by the Madhya
Pradesh High Court, the Bench observed: "It appears to us that the accused appellant is a young man
addicted to drugs who needed money to sustain his habits. The accused comes from a deprived socio-
economic background without any criminal history and his conduct while in custody does not suffer from
any blemish. The possibility of reformation, on the materials on record, cannot be ruled out. "Apart from
other factors like young age, absence of criminal history and his conduct in custody, the court also
observed, referring to SantoshKumar, SatishbhushanBariyar vs. State of Maharashtra, since the evidence
in the case is entirely circumstantial, though it would not be a determinative factor, the same would be one
of the factors that could be taken into account in adjudging the sentence to be awarded.

SEPTEMBER 15: SOUMYA CASE (KERALA) (GOVINDASWAMY VS. STATE OF KERALA)

Hearing at Supreme Court (2014-2016).The accused preferred Special Leave Petition in the Supreme
Court and the criminal appeal was finally heard by a three-judge Bench comprising Justice Ranjan Gogoi,
Justice Prafulla C Pant and Justice Uday Umesh Lalit on 8 September, 2016. There was a huge media
outrage when the Bench, during the course of hearing, expressed doubts with regard to Soumya’s ‘jump’
from the train. Reserving the judgment, the Bench remarked: “The court is convinced that Soumya was
raped. The court also understands that she died due to head injury. However, it should be clarified whether
Soumya was pushed from the train or whether she herself jumped from the train.”
THE LAW COMMISSION REPORT

Data shows a huge gap between death sentences pronounced and actual executions. According to an
ACHR report and National Crime Records Bureau (NCRB) data, there have been several death sentences
between 2001 and 2011. But the authorities actually carried out only a few of these. Despite the fact that
death sentences rarely convert to executions in India, the Law Commission recommends abolishing the
penalty in most cases.

According to leading criminal lawyers in India, people sentenced to death by Indian courts face long
delays in trials and appeals. “During this time, the prisoner on death row suffers from extreme agony,
anxiety, and fear arising out of an imminent yet uncertain execution,” the Law Commission said. It added
that solitary confinement and harsh conditions imposed on prisoners were degrading and oppressive.

The Law Commission report cited the following reasons while advocating the abolition of capital
punishment:

 Developments in India. India has made significant progress since the last report in 1967. The level
of education, general well-being, and socio-economic developments are vastly different today.
 Death penalty as a deterrent is a myth. The decline in murder rate in India has coincided with a
decline in rate of executions. This raises questions about whether the death penalty has any greater
deterrent effect than life imprisonment.
 Arbitrary sentencing of capital punishment. The Supreme Court has expressed concerns over
arbitrary imposition of capital punishment. In most cases, the courts have affirmed or refused to
affirm the death penalty without laying down legal principles.
 Long delays leading to extreme agony. Death row prisoners continue to face long delays in trials,
appeals, and executive clemency. During this time, prisoners on death row suffer from agony,
anxiety, and fear because of an imminent yet uncertain execution.
 International developments. India has retained capital punishment while 140 countries have
abolished it in law or in practice. That leaves India in a club with the USA, Iran, China, and Saudi
Arabia as a country which retains it.
 The commission concluded that the death penalty does not serve the goal of deterrence any more
than life imprisonment.
  Capital Punishment Capital punishment has been a matter of debate for long now, and across the
world public opinion is, by and large, in favour of abolishing it, as it is increasingly seen as a
barbaric measure to check crime.
 Modern abolitionist jurists are of the view that if killing is wrong, no amount of legal or social
sanction can make it right. If it is wrong for a man to kill another man, so it is even for the State to
do. Besides, citing statistics, they argue that capital punishment has had no visible effect as a
deterrent and has utterly failed to bring in a dip in the number of murders, which, according to
them, makes capital punishment completely useless.
 Why kill the killers when it helps none and nothing, seems to be the belief. To them, capital
punishment is a barbarous measure of no avail that has its place in the annals of history and not in
modern statute books.
 Abolition of death penalty is largely seen as a step in the interest of human dignity in line with
Article 5 of International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, 1966 and its protocol in 1989,
besides, of course, Article 3 of Universal Declaration of Human Rights, adopted on December 10,
1948 and Article 21 of our own Constitution.
 The arguments on the side of the retentionists are equally strong. However, in India the Supreme
Court has made death penalty applicable only to the rarest of rare cases – the cases where the act is
no less than shocking to human conscience.
 The landmark cases where the death sentences were awarded in India are RangaBilla case, Indira
Gandhi and Rajiv Gandhi Assassination case, LaxmanNayak case and most recently in 2004 Hatab
case of West Bengal where accused DhananjoyChatterjee was hanged on 14 August, 2004, on his
birthday, after Supreme Court affirmed the death sentence awarded by the lower courts. The
President also declined his plea for pardon.
 In the year 2003 government laid a Bill in the Parliament, which proposed to add a provision of
death penalty in Drugs and Cosmetics Act. After the new government came in power in June 2004,
President Dr. A.P.J. Abdul Kalam suggested that Parliament should consider the abolition of death
sentence altogether.

EXECUTION OF THE DEATH SENTENCE

The execution of death sentence in India is carried by hanging by the neck till death.

HANGING

The Code of Criminal Procedure (1898) called for the method of execution to be hanging. The same
method was adopted in the Code of Criminal Procedure (1973). Section 354(5) of the above procedure
reads as "When any person is sentenced to death, the sentence shall direct that the person be hanged by the
neck till the person is dead."
SHOOTING

The Army Act, The Navy Act and The Air Force Act also provide for the execution of the death
sentence.Section 34 of the Air Force Act, 1950 empowers the court martial to impose the death sentence
for the offences mentioned in section 34(a) to (o) of The Air Force Act, 1950.

DEATH FOR CHILD RAPE-THE CRIMINAL LAW AMENDMENT

ORDINANCE, 2018 PROMULGATED: SALIENT FEATURES
An ordinance providing the death penalty for rapists of girls below 12 years of age and other stringent
penal provisions for rape has been promulgated on April 21, 2018.

The Criminal Law Amendment Ordinance, 2018, amends Indian Penal Code, Code of Criminal Procedure,
Indian Evidence Act and Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act.

Salient Features of the Ordinance

 Minimum Punishment for Rape made Ten Years.

 Minimum punishment of twenty years to a person committing rape on a woman aged below 16.
 Minimum Punishment of 20 years rigorous imprisonment and maximum Death penalty/life
imprisonment for committing rape on a girl aged below 12.
 Fine imposed shall be just and reasonable to meet the medical expenses and rehabilitation of the
victim.
 Police officer committing rape anywhere shall be awarded rigorous imprisonment of minimum 10
years.
 Investigation in rape cases to be completed within 2 months.
 No Anticipatory bail can be granted to a person accused of rape of girls of age less than sixteen
years.
 Appeals in rape cases to be disposed within six months.

AMENDMENT TO IPC

 Section 376 IPC: Minimum Punishment for Rape has been made Ten Years. It was Seven Years
earlier. The maximum punishment remains the same, i.e. Life imprisonment.
  A new clause (3) has been added to section 376,which prescribes the Minimum punishment of
twenty years to a person committing rape on a woman under Sixteen years of Age.
 A new section 376AB has been inserted which prescribes the minimum punishment of twenty
years rigorous imprisonment to a person committing rape on a woman less than Twelve years of
Age. Such a person can be awarded capital sentence as well.
 Section 376DA and section376DB provide minimum punishment of life imprisonment for persons
involved in gang rape of woman aged less than 16 years and 12 years respectively.
 Death penalty is also prescribed for persons involved in gang rape of a girl of age less than 12
years.
 It is also provided in these sections, that such fine shall be imposed which shall be just and
reasonable to meet the medical expenses and rehabilitation of the victim and the fine imposed is to
be paid to the victim.
 Section376(2)(a), the sentence within the limits of the police station to which such police officer is
appointed has been omitted. The omissions implies, no matter where a police officer commits rape,
he has to be punished with rigorous imprisonment of minimum Ten years.

AMENDMENT TO CrPC

 The investigation in relation to in all Rape cases may be completed within three months from the
date on which the information was recorded by the officer in charge of the police station.
 The provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure have also been amended to insert a subsection
which prescribes six months’ time to dispose of an appeal in rape cases.
 No anticipatory bail can be granted to a person accused of rape of girls of age less than sixteen
years.
 New sub section has been added section 439 which mandates presence of informant or any person
authorized by him at the time of hearing application for bail to a person accused of rape of girls of
age less than sixteen years.

AMENDMENT TO POCSO AND EVIDENCE ACT

Section 42 of the POCSO Act has been also amended to include newly inserted IPC provisions section
376AB, 376DA, and 376DB, section 53A of the Evidence Act that deals with evidence of character or
previous sexual experience not relevant in certain cases section 146 of the act deals with evidence of
character or previous sexual experience not relevant in certain cases, has also been amended to include
newly inserted IPC provisions section 376AB, section 376DA, section 376DB.
CONS OF CAPITAL PUNISHMENT
There are many theories which held capital punishment to be should be banned. This makes many
of us to think whether capital punishment which is the upmost punishment to be practiced by the
court or not.

1. Human Rights violation

This is the strongest of all the arguments. Human rights which are defined as the basic rights to be given to
an individual to lead a respectable life are considered to be the most important right to be observed by any
individual. Right to life is the basic right of any human being. Every individual has a right to live whether
criminal or not. No human has a right to infringe the right to life of any individual, irrespective of his
deeds.

2. Wrongful execution

No one can be perfect, and so the Judiciary. It is often seen that innocent people face wrongful execution.
Many people have become the victim of this wrongful execution which leads to lose of faith in law and
justice among citizens. Sometimes improper procedure leads to unfair execution. Life of an innocent is
more precious than the perpetrator. This loophole in law is out of human error in order to avoid action
leading to such irrevocable consequences. Thus, Capital Punishment should be banned.

POSITION OF CAPITAL PUNISHMENT IN FOREIGN COUNTRIES

Capital punishment in the United Kingdom

Capital punishment in the United Kingdom was used from ancient times until the second half of the 20th
century. The last executions in the United Kingdom were by hanging, and took place in 1964, prior to
capital punishment being abolished for murder (in 1965 in Great Britain and in 1973 in Northern Ireland).
Although unused, the death penalty remained a legally defined punishment for certain offences such as
treason until it was completely abolished in 1998. In 2004 the 13th Protocol to the European Convention
on Human Rights became binding on the United Kingdom, prohibiting the restoration of the death penalty
for as long as the UK is a party to the Convention.

Capital punishment in China

Capital punishment is a legal penalty in the mainland of the People's Republic of China. It is mostly
enforced for murder and drug trafficking, and executions are carried out by lethal injection or gun shot.

The People's Republic of China executes the highest number of people annually, though other countries
(such as Iran) have higher per capita execution rates.The estimated number of executions was 2,400 in
2013.The number of death sentences is a state secret.

Capital punishment in Pakistan

Capital punishment is a legal penalty in Pakistan. Although there have been numerous amendments to the
Constitution, there is yet to be a provision prohibiting the death penalty as a punitive remedy.

A moratorium on executions was imposed in 2008. No executions occurred from 2009 to 2011, with 1 in
2012 and 0 in 2013. The moratorium was lifted fully after the massacre of 132 students and 9 members of
staff of the Army Public School and Degree College Peshawar, and routine executions resumed. Pakistan
carried out 7 executions in 2014, 326 in 2015, 87 in 2016, and 65 in 2017.Hanging is the only legal
method of execution

Capital punishment in Saudi Arabia

Capital punishment is a legal penalty in Saudi Arabia. The country performed at least 158 executions in
2015, at least 154 executions in 2016, and at least 146 executions in 2017

Death sentences in Saudi Arabia are pronounced almost exclusively based on the system of judicial
sentencing discretion (tazir) rather than Sharia-prescribed (hudud) punishments, following the classical
principle that hudud penalties should be avoided if possible. The rise in death sentences during recent
decades resulted from a concerted reaction by the government and the courts to a rise of violent crime in
the 1970s and paralleled similar developments in the U.S. and China in late 20th century.
CONCLUSION

Data shows a huge gap between death sentences pronounced and actual executions. According to an
ACHR report and National Crime Records Bureau (NCRB) data, there have been several death sentences
between 2001 and 2011. But the authorities actually carried out only a few of these. Despite the fact that
death sentences rarely convert to executions in India, the Law Commission recommends abolishing the
penalty in most cases. This has been earlier mentioned this fact cannot be mitigated or be overlooked that
death penalty is the reason of fear in most of the offenders this is evident from the numerous appeals made
to supreme court and high courts for commuting the punishment into life imprisonment and one death
penalty sets an example in the whole society that if anyone commits a heinous crime he will have to lose
his life. Apart from this India is a varied from other arabian and islamic countries and only awards death
penaly in rarest of the rare cases and hardly in any cases it is found that criminal justice system has given a
wrong death sentence. If death penaly is completely removed from the punishment list it will have a
promoting effect on many offenders and criminals so Death Penaly or capital punishment should remain a
part of the penal laws.

REFERENCES

 livelaw.in
 Section 303
 Article 19
 Article 21
 Indian Penal Code
 Section 376
 Section 376DA
 Section 376DB
 Section376(2)(a)
 Section 439
 Section 354(5)
 section 34(a) to (o) of The Air Force Act
 Jagmohan Singh v. State of U.P
 Mithu v. State of Punjab, (1980) 2 SCC 684
 Code of Criminal Procedure
 Indian Evidence Act
 Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act
 THE CRIMINAL LAW AMENDMENT ORDINANCE ,2018
 Section 376AB