CAPITAL PUNISHMENT: COMPARITIVE STUDY AMONG INDIA,US AND

UK

SUBMITTED BY-

NAME- SHIVANGI
ROLL NO- 1077
SECTION-B
SEM- IX

SUBMITTED TO- Dr.Shreemanshu Das

Assistant professor(Law)

National University Of Study and Research in Law ,Ranchi

 Research Problem:
The criminal justice system's sentencing policy is unfair and unjust worldwide, and judges'
discretion can lead to unfair and unexplainable consequences. More research is needed to
understand the reasons of rising gaps and how to reduce them. It is possible that we might develop
more plausible theories concerning the reason of these imbalance in the criminal justice system if
we examine a wide range of cases, judgements, and research about sentencing policies and compare
them to those in other jurisdictions. This research paper aims at finding out the policy of sentencing
in India and other countries for better understanding of the readers.

Research Objective:
1. To research and develop better understanding of the sentencing policy in India.

2. To investigate the primary justification for using punishment as a sentencing factor.

3. To analyze and draw comparison between different countries in respect of their

sentencing policy.

Research Methodology :
This is a doctrinal study where the researcher is trying to analyze the critical role of Indian judiciary in
developing the concept of conservation of forest Resources in India. The study requires in depth study
of provisions relating Forest Conservation in Indian Constitution, specific laws related to it, other laws
indirectly dealing with forest conservation and various judicial pronouncements on this subject. The
research is based on the secondary data as it is a doctrinal research. The secondary sources of data are
books on the subject, articles from various national and international journals, judicial
pronouncements, law journals, All India reporters, Supreme Court cases and reports of committees
etc.
1.INTRODUCTION:
The global surge in crime rates is concerning, & India is not immune. This makes it very evident
that a 'fair criminal justice system' is required, as well as the imposition of a penalty that is both
suitable as well as appropriate is an essential component of any legal code. The "Indian Penal Code
of 1860" (abbreviated 'I.P.C.'), 'The Indian Evidence Act of 1872', &'The Code of Criminal
Procedure of 1973', are the principal pieces of legislation governing criminal law & punishment in
India.The distinction between a sentence & a punishment must be recognized at all times. They
have a relationship, but it does not make them 'interchangeable'. When it comes to definitions,
'sentences' are remarks ,made in court rulings outlining the specific legal consequences of a given
offense. Following execution and institutionalization, one might refer to the same action as
punishment. As a result, the sentencing is seen as the first stage towards actually administering
punishment. In addition to being a developing nation, India now has higher than average rates of
crime. In India, there are numerous laws aimed at reducing and avoiding criminal activity. It is
necessary for the punishment to be severe in order to reduce the crime, and it should be intended to
penalize the offende.There are two causes for punishment. The first is that the wrongdoer has to
suffer, & the second is that ,it discourages others from committing crime. The severity of
punishment is mostly determined by the severity of the crime. The individual ,who is found guilty
and convicted for the crime & is sentenced. The clear purpose in the process of administering
punishment is 'to punish the wrongdoer & do justice to the victim ',while also creating new norms.
Our country's criminal justice system rightly tries to defend rights while creating a decent the basis
for society to function properly. Some of the crucial responsibilities assigned to our criminal justice
system include punishing the offender, ensuring justice, compensating the victims,& providing
safety to them. Occasionally, the application of punishment is impeded by the existence of political
power in the area. This implies that the severity of the punishment for the same offense & the act of
offense will both alter in response to changes in the ideology and the government. History reveals
that crimes have historically been closely associated with religious sanction and have been seen as
both sins and offenses without distinction.”All of us are God's creation. I'm not sure if a human-
made system is capable of ending a life on the basis of created and artificial proof.

- A.P.J. Abdul Kalam

1. When an individual receives a punishment for their wrongdoing, it is usually done for two
primary reasons: 1.) The first is that the person who perpetrated the wrong must bear the
consequences of their actions.

2. Second, punishing wrongdoers sets an example for others.

In India, the "rarest of the rare test" theory—expressed in the Bachan Singh v. State of Punjab case
—is used to decide cases involving the death penalty. Consequently, the death penalty will only be
applied in "rarest of the rare cases”.
1.) When the murder is perpetrated in such a cruel, repulsive, or despicable manner as to raise the
community's intense and extreme anger.

2.) When a murder of a Scheduled Caste member occurs, causing social outrage.

3.) If the "Bride Burning" or "Dowry Death" occurs.

4.) When the crime is out of proportion.

5.) When the victim of murder is an innocent child, a vulnerable woman, or a person rendered
helpless by mature age or illness. When the injured party is a person on whom the slaughterer has
authority or reliance. When the injured party is a civic figure, and the murder is committed for
political or similar reasons rather than personal reasons.

2.The Doctrine of “Rarest of Rare”

The death penalty should only be applied in the most exceptional circumstances, according to the
Supreme Court's ruling in the Bachan Singh v. State of Punjab case. This Supreme Court opinion,
which sought to lessen the use of the death penalty, was strongly supported.

In the Bachan Singh case, the Supreme Court adopted the Ratio Decidenti, or the Rule of Law,
which states that the death sentence is only permissible when it serves as a substitute for life in
prison. The same will apply in the extremely unlikely event that the other option is absolutely
blocked off.

Furthermore, the Supreme Court explained in the case of Santosh Kumar Bariyar v. State of
Maharashtra that "the rarest of rare dictum only serves as a guideline in enforcing the provisions
mentioned in Section 354(3) of CrPC and entrenches the policy that life imprisonment is the rule
and death punishment is an exception."

Art 21 of the Indian Constitution, provides that no one shall be deprived of his "Right to
Life" unless done with due process of law. When the death penalty is applied, the scope of
introducing new facts or law in the case is likewise limited. If the punishment has been carried out,
it is unchangeable.

3.Law Commission Report of 2015

To protect national security, India's Law Commission suggested in its 262nd Report (August 2015)
that the idea of the death penalty be eliminated for all crimes other than terrorism-related offenses.1

The Law Commission determined in its earlier review in 1967 that India could not risk the
"experiment of abolition of capital punishment." However, the Commission stated in 2015 that "the
commission believes that the time has come for India to move toward abolition of the death
penalty."

1Report No. 262, The Death Penalty, Law Commission

of India, 2015.
Despite the fact that death penalties are rarely carried out in India, the commission recommended
that the penalty be removed. The following are the explanations given by the commission: 1.)
Times have changed.

2.) It is ineffective as a deterrent.

3.) The Indian legal system is deficient.

4.Rate of Execution and Commutation of Capital Punishment in India

The capital punishment is legal in India, however just seven people have been executed between
1998 and 2018. There were 1303 capital sentence verdicts issued between 2004 and 2013, yet just
three criminals were executed during this time period. From 2004 to 2012, not a single execution
was carried out.

In the last 20 years, 3751 death sentences have been commuted to life sentences. Yakub and 11
others were convicted and sentenced to death in 2007, in July. By a special court for planning or
carrying out the 1993 Mumbai bombing, which killed over 260 people and injured many more.

In March 2013, the Supreme Court maintained ,Memon's death sentence while commuting the death
sentences of ten others to life imprisonment.

Just 4 people have been hanged until death in the last 14 years:

1.) Chatterjee Dhananjoy (August 14, 2004).

2.) Mohammad Amir Kasab, born on November 21, 2012.

3.) February 9, 2013; Afzal Guru.

4.) on July 30, 2015, YakubMemon.

Commutation of Capital Punishment

The President of India and the Governor of any State are authorized by the Indian Constitution,
Articles 161 and 72, to grant pardons, reprieves, respites, or remissions of penalties, as well as to
suspend, remit, or commute the sentence of any individual found guilty of any offence.

(a) in any situation in which a Court Martial is imposing the penalty or sentence;

(b) in any situation in which the penalty or sentence relates to an offense against any law pertaining
to a subject over which the Union's or State's executive authority extends;

(c) in all circumstances when the decree is a fatality verdict.

Legal Procedure

Just after a sessions (trial) court renders a death verdict, a high court must uphold the decision to
make it final. The sentenced convict may file an appeal with the Supreme Court when the
conviction is upheld by the High Court. The sentenced person may file a "mercy petition" to the
Governor of the State and the President of India if this is not practicable, or if the Supreme Court
declines to hear the petition or rejects the appeal.

Although the Government of India Act 1935 gave rise to the President and Governors' current
constitutional mercy powers, independent Indian presidents and governors do not have prerogative
clemency powers like the Governor-General does.

Execution Procedure

1. Hanging

As per the Indian Criminal Procedure Code, the mode of execution used in the civilian court system
is hanging.

2. Shooting

Both hanging and shooting are recognized as lawful means of death in the military court-martial
system under the 1950 Army Act.

5.Capital Punishment in UK:

The United Kingdom is one of 140 countries that do not have the death penalty. Despite the fact that
the British used harsh execution sentences in India, the situation in Britain was different. Since the
1957 Homicide Act, which limited the number of people executed each year, British law has been
more lenient on the death penalty. The Murder (Abolition of the Death Sentence) Act 1965 repealed
the act, limiting the death penalty to four crimes: treason, espionage, piracy with violence, and
dockyard arson. It is noteworthy that no one has been sentenced to death since 1964, when the last
execution occurred. Even though the United Kingdom had a statute authorizing the death penalty, it
was not used.

The last person put to death for John Alan West's murder was 'Peter Anthony Allen.' The House of
Commons ,approved the convention created by the European Commission on Human Rights, which
led to its repeal in the UK, with the exception of war or impending hostilities. The right to life in
general and the death penalty in particular are protected by the Human Rights Act of 1998.

It is abundantly evident from Article 2 that everyone's right to life is protected by the law. Nobody
can be wilfully deprived of their life unless it is done in order to carry out a court order after being
found guilty of a crime for which the death penalty is mandated by law.2

Except in times of war, as indicated above, the 6th Protocol affirmed its abolition. A 2004 amending
act,however, replaced it with the 13th Protocol, which completely ended the death sentence in British
law. The European Commission for Human Rights issued a protocol that states, 'convinced that the
right to life is a fundamental value in an undemocratic society and that the abolition of the death
penalty is essential for the protection of this right ,and the full recognition of the inherent dignity of
all human being’

But the problem of the desert still exists. Was it right for a murderer to be killed? Opponents of this
act still raise the same issue.Seventy percent of participants in a 'British study 'supported the death
sentence. This casts doubt on the death penalty debate. The consequentialist viewpoint holds that
someone who has committed serious crimes may still have a criminal tendency even after they are
freed. in order to carry out additional killings. A single fatality could avert thousands of deaths. The
legitimacy of the question, however, is based only on probability theories. How can the law impose
a penalty for a crime that could or might not happen in the future, especially if it results in death?

For this reason, the death sentence was outlawed in the United Kingdom. In the UK, someone can
only deny someone else their right to life in the following situations: (a) Self-defense against
unlawful action; (b) Making a valid arrest or preventing someone who is lawfully imprisoned from
escaping; or (c) Using legal measures to put an end to a riot or revolt.3

6.Capital Punishment in USA:

For the purpose of maintaining public safety, a number of countries still uphold the death penalty in
spite of strong worldwide opposition. Euthanasia is morally abhorrent, in contrast to libertarian
beliefs, which place the highest value on life and freedom. It is ironic that in a nation founded on
libertarian ideals, the death penalty still exists in the United States. The death sentence is required by
US law for treasonous activities, large-scale drug trafficking, murder, and attempted murder of
judges. For offenses covered by Title 18, United States Code, Sec. 2381 (treason), Sec794
(gathering or delivering defense information to a foreign government), or Sec. 3593, if the defendant
has willfully killed the victim, caused serious bodily harm that resulted in death,either deliberately
engaged in an act that causes grave physical injury to another person or, deliberately participated in
an act that ,directly resulted in the death of a person.

2Clause 1, Article 2, Schedule 1, Human Rights Act, 1998 accessed on 26th September, 2022
https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1998/42/schedule/1 last accessed on 3rd October, 2022

3 Clause 2, Article 2, Schedule 1, Human Rights Act, 1998 https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1998/42/schedule/1

last accessed on 3rd October, 2022
Sec 359 lists the following as mitigating circumstances for murder: lack of prior criminal
record,mental illness, victim's consent to death; unusual or substantial duress; defendant's minor
degree of participation; the presence of equally culpable defendants, or other circumstantial factors.

The constitutionality of it was an issue of great debate in American politics. Its unpredictability,
arbitrary nature, mysterious delays, & pervasive abandonment in several US states raised concerns.
Bias and related issues, as well as erroneous conviction & exoneration, were linked to unreliability
concerns. Discrimination, misogyny, and insufficient funding for capital defense were mentioned as
causes of arbitrariness. The prolonged execution time was also mentioned because it undermines the
aim. There is a bias in the decision ,as a result of the 'court-mandated capital juror qualification'.
According to prejudice research, opinions about the death penalty can surely affect a case.
The 8th amendment to the United States Constitution was a major point of contention in this regard.
Additionally, it states, 'Exorbitant bail, excessive fines, & harsh and unusual penalties should not be
necessary or imposed.' The interpretation of this article in the 1972 case 'Furman v.Georgia' resulted
in the death penalty being abolished.The bulk of individuals imprisoned in America were black. This
issue has multiple root causes. One example is the connection between money & politics.

7.DATA ANALYSIS:

Figure 1:

Figure 2:
This chart chronicles the United State’s use of the death penalty over the past four centuries. The
chart highlights the gradual rise in use of capital punishment in the seventeenth, eighteenth, and
nineteenth centuries; a peak of executions in the early 20th century; moratorium; and then the
resumption of executions after moratorium.
The use of the death penalty has declined sharply in the United States over the past 25 years. New
death sentences have fallen more than 85% since peaking at more than 300 death sentences per year
in the mid 1990s. Executions have declined by 75% since peaking at 98 in 1999.4

4History of the death penalty (2023) Death Penalty Information Center. Available at:
https://deathpenaltyinfo.org/facts- and-research/history-of-the-death-penalty (Accessed: 27 October 2023).
Figure 3:

As many as 2,052 individuals were awarded capital punishment by courts in India between 1998
and 2013. Courts awarded the death sentence to 1,677 individuals during the first 13 years of the
21st century. On an average more than 128 persons were sentenced to death per year during this
period. Unfortunately, the gender break up of these figures is not available in the NCRB datasets.

The most number of death sentences handed down in any given year was 2007 when courts across
India punished 186 individuals in this manner. In 2000, 165 individuals received death sentences
while 164 individuals received this punishment in 2005. 1999 (155 individuals) and 2003 (142
individuals) take the fourth and the fifth place on this list of years in which the most number of
death sentences were awarded.

The least number of death sentences were awarded in 1998 (55 individuals). 97 persons each were
awarded the capital punishment during the years 2010 and 2013. 2011 with 117 individuals and
2013 with 125 individuals figure at fourth and fifth places respectively on the list of years when the
least number of death sentences were handed down by courts.
Figure 4:

With 506 individuals awarded the death sentences during the 16 year period, Uttar Pradesh alone
accounts for almost a quarter (24.65%) of the total figure calculated for the 16 year period. This
figure could be higher because data is not available for the year 1998 in the NCRB datasets.

With 178 individuals so punished, Bihar stands 2nd in the list of States/UTs where the most
number of death sentences were awarded by courts during the period 1998-2013. In Madhya
Pradesh 162 individuals received the death sentence placing it 3rd on the list of States/UTs. In
2013, Madhya Pradesh topped the list of States/UTs where the most number of death sentences (22)
were awarded.

Maharashtra takes 4th place with 160 individuals receiving capital punishment during this period.
Tamil Nadu is at the 5th place with 147 individuals receiving capital punishment during the 16 year
period.

Three States, namely, Chhattisgarh (carved out of the erstwhile undivided Madhya Pradesh),
Jharkhand (carved out of the erstwhile undivided Bihar) and Uttarakhand (carved out of the
erstwhile Uttar Pradesh) came into existence towards the end of the year 2000. Amongst them,
Jharkhand takes the top position with 91 individuals being handed the death sentence during the last
13 years (2001-2013). In Chhattisgarh only 29 persons were awarded capital punishment during the
same period and in Uttarakhand this figure was 18.

Interestingly, in Karnataka, no death sentences were handed down between 1998- 2003. All 107
death sentences were handed down during the years 2008 (22), 2010 (19), 2005 and 2007 (14 each),
2006 (13), 2012 (8), 2004 (7) and 2009 (5). In 2013, 4 individuals received the capital punishment
in Karnataka.5

Similarly, no death sentences were awarded in Gujarat during the period 1998-2000. All 62
death sentences were awarded during the years 2004 (19), 2011 (14), 2005 and 2009 (8 each),
2003 (5) and 2001 and 2012 (3 each). In 2013, 2 individuals received the death sentence in this
State.

A person was least likely to receive the death sentence in the States of Arunachal Pradesh,
Nagaland, Mizoram, Sikkim and the UTs of Dadra and Nagar Haveli and Lakshadweep as they
have not recorded any such instance during the 16 year period.

Figure 5:

In 2018 alone, 186 persons were awarded capital punishment in the country. Of this, 26 were
reported from Madhya Pradesh, 25 from Uttar Pradesh, and Jharkhand & Maharashtra reported 20
each. These four states alone account for 49% of the total capital punishments awarded in 2018.
While 5 states and Delhi reported one each, nine states including Andhra Pradesh, Telangana,
Sikkim, Nagaland, Meghalaya, Mizoram, Arunachal Pradesh, Goa, and Jammu and Kashmir
reported zero capital punishments in 2018.However, the death sentence of 65 convicts was
commuted to life imprisonment in 2018. Bihar reported 12 such cases (18.5%), Madhya Pradesh
reported 11 (16.9%) and Rajasthan reported 10 cases (15.4%). Together, these states accounted for
almost 51% such cases.

5Muthyanolla, S.K. et al. (2018) More than 2000 individuals were awarded Death sentence in India between 1998 &
2013, FACTLY. Available at: https://factly.in/more-than-2000-individuals-were-awarded-death-sentence-in-india-
between-1998-2013/#prettyPhoto (Accessed: 27 October 2023).
In addition to the 186 persons sentenced to death in 2018, there were 206 prisoners convicted in
previous years and awarded death penalty, thereby resulting in a total of 402 prisoners serving
capital punishment or death penalty. These convicts accounted for 0.3% of the total convicts behind
the bars in India in 2018.

Figure 6:

On average, around 131 persons are sentenced to capital punishment by courts in India annually.
Although the numbers are fluctuating, the years 2007 and 2018 witnessed the maximum number of
capital punishments in the last 19 years with 186 cases each. In addition to the 186 persons
sentenced to death in 2018, there were 206 prisoners convicted in previous years and awarded death
penalty, thereby resulting in a total of 402 prisoners serving capital punishment or death penalty.
These convicts accounted for 0.3% of the total convicts behind the bars in India in 2018.6

6Muthyanolla, S.K. and M, P.K. (2020) 2500 death penalties since the year 2000, only 4 executions, FACTLY.
Available at: https://factly.in/2500-death-penalties-since-the-year-2000-only-4-executions/ (Accessed: 27 October
2023).
Figure 7:

Figure 8:
For the eighth consecutive year, fewer than 50 new death sentences were imposed in the United
States and fewer than 30 executions were carried out. Six states carried out executions, while twelve
imposed new death sentences. With the exception of the pandemic years of 2020 and 2021, the 20
new death sentences — just two above last year’s record low of 18 — were the fewest imposed in
any year in the U.S. in the past half-century. The 18 executions also were fewer than in any pre-
pandemic year since 1991.
Death sentences and executions have both fallen dramatically from their peak usage in the 1990s.
Death sentences in 2022 were 93.7% below the peak of 315 in 1996. Executions have dropped by
82% since their peak of 98 in 1999. The number of people on death row across the country also
declined for the 21st consecutive year, with resentencings to life or less again outpacing the number
of new death sentences. As of April 1, there were 2,414 people on death row.7

7 The death penalty in 2022: Year end report (no date) Death Penalty Information Center. Available at: https://
deathpenaltyinfo.org/facts-and-research/dpic-reports/dpic-year-end-reports/the-death-penalty-in-2022-year-end-report
(Accessed: 27 October 2023).
 Figure 9:

The death penalty is a legal punishment in 31 US states.Since 1976 Texas has carried out the most
executions (548), followed by Virginia (113) and Oklahoma (112). There are 2,817 inmates on
death row in the US. California has the most prisoners on death row, 746, but has carried out only
13 executions since 1976.8

8.RECENT LANDMARK JUDGEMENTS:

Manoj v. State of Madhya Pradesh (2022):

In the most recent important case, Manoj v. State of Madhya Pradesh (2022) SCC Online SC 677;
1
the Supreme Court upheld the decision and the guidelines established in Bachan Singh's case. The
Court decided that the Bachan Singh principles must be applied to each individual case based on its
unique circumstances ,& the death sentence only applies where the alternative option is clearly
forfeited. In this case, the Court issued a number of recommendations for improving the evaluation
of the boundaries & purview of rehabilitation.

8 Jeffrey, J. (2018) How us death penalty capital changed its mind, BBC News. Available at:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/ news/world-us-canada-42984170 (Accessed: 27 October 2023).

1
• At the trial stage, mitigating circumstances in the case must be taken into account.
• Both the state & the accused must provide information to the 'trial court' for it.
• The state should collect more data; such as age, family background, previous
& present situations, education, criminal records, income, type of occupation, & so on, during a set
time limit.
• Other relevant aspects, such as 'sicknesses or unstable behavior', should be considered in each
situation based on the facts. This information must be presented to the court, at the time of
sentencing, and the accused must be allowed to submit a defense & any mitigation factors.
• The behavior inside the prison, the work done there, the involvement, along with other
relevant reports from authorities & required experts.

Manoj Pratap Singh v. State of Rajasthan (2022):

In this case, the Supreme Court affirmed the death penalty imposed on a 37-year-old man for the
rape and killing of a seven-and-a-half-year-old autistic child. The incident was committed in
Rajasthan in 2013 when the accused, Manoj Pratap Singh, was roughly twenty-eight years old.
According to a three-judge panel, the crime was performed with severe inhumanity, especially given
'the victim's vulnerability & the way in which it was committed.'

The convict kidnapped the victim ,on a stolen motorcycle by taking advantage of the confidence
established by the offer of confectionery items. She was then sexually raped & her skull bashed,
resulting in numerous injuries, including a fracture of the frontal bone. The victim also suffered
serious injuries in ‘private parts’.

The Supreme Court concluded that there appears to be little hope of his reformation and
rehabilitation because these mitigating elements are weighed against a number of other factors
relevant to his antecedents.

The accused had a criminal record ,as well as had been engaged in at least four incidents involving
theft, destruction of public property, as well as attempted murder, according to the Court.
Furthermore, a stolen motorcycle was employed in the current incident. The criminal had previously
been convicted guilty of murdering another inmate & had received a seven-day term for fighting with
another prisoner, according to the Court.

The Court even went so far as to declare after taking all the factors into consideration, the
defendant a 'danger to the maintenance of order in society' after his conviction.According to the
Court, the alternative of giving the defendant a life sentence without 'commutation 'was likewise
unrealistic in light of the accused's incorrigible behavior. The Bench ruled that because it was
unavoidable in this situation, it had 'no choice but to confirm the death sentence awarded to the
applicant.'
Mohd. Arif @ Ashfaq v. State (NCT Of Delhi) (2022):

The facts in this case began on December 22, 2000, when some intruders opened fire
indiscriminately, killing three persons, including two army Jawans from the 7th Rajputana Rifles. In
this case, Mohd. Arif, who is unquestionably a Pakistani citizen, was apprehended on December 25,
2000. On October 24, 2005, a Trial Court declared him guilty, and on October 31, 2005, the Court
sentenced him to death. In an order dated September 13, 2007, the Delhi High Court upheld his
'death sentence.'The Supreme Court upheld the execution of Lashkar-e-Taiba insurgent Mohammed
Arif in Nov 2022, for the 2000 Red Fort Attack, which killed three people, including two army
commanders.

9.CONCLUSION:

Since time immemorial, India has practiced the death sentence, often known as capital punishment.
The death sentence has been the most common punishment in India for offenses & crimes that
essentially violate the law ,since the days of the monarch. There was no concept of 'heinous or
serious crimes' warranting the death penalty. In the modern period, ideas such as 'rarest of rare
cases,'special reasons,' 'grievous crimes,''serious acts,' & so on are considered before imposing the
death penalty.The death penalty is a sensitive issue; worldwide opposition has grown dramatically,
as several countries have banned it as a form of 'punishment.'

Article 6 of the International Covenant on' Civil & Political Rights' establishes critical safeguards
that signatories who still apply the death sentence must keep; yet, it does not eliminate it's use.
Despite the outrage over Nirbhaya's case, both the 'International Commission of Jurists & Amnesty
International India 'condemned the executions. Apart from India, both Australian & American law
apply the death sentence for 'murder as well as rape 'crimes. With the exception of terrorist actions,
the Law Commission likewise advocated the removal of the death sentence in its 262nd Report. As
a result, there will be no blanket prohibition. It is critical at this point to recall cases in India where
the accused received the death penalty & were executed.

The use of the death penalty is recognized in society as an effective deterrent as well as a form of
'retributive & preventive 'punishment. Many argue that it infringes on fundamental human rights &
is no longer an effective deterrent. In the Indian context, it can be claimed that ;some crimes are so
'henious & horrifying' in nature ,that the societal conscience is so profoundly wounded that no
punishment less than the death penalty is fair or reasonable. Death warrants are only issued in the
most extreme instances in India, and they are always the exception. As a result, completely
abolishing the death penalty would put the nation at risk since the State would be unable to take the
necessary steps.
BIBLIOGRAPHY:

Jeffrey, J. (2018) How us death penalty capital changed its mind, BBC News. Available at:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-42984170 (Accessed: 27 October 2023).

The death penalty in 2022: Year end report (no date) Death Penalty Information Center.
Available at: https://deathpenaltyinfo.org/facts-and-research/dpic-reports/dpic-year-end-
reports/the-death-penalty-in-2022-year-end-report (Accessed: 27 October 2023).

Clause 1, Article 2, Schedule 1, Human Rights Act, 1998 accessed on 26th September, 2022
https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1998/42/schedule/1 last accessed on 3rd October, 2022

Clause 2, Article 2, Schedule 1, Human Rights Act, 1998 https://www.legislation.gov.uk/

ukpga/1998/42/schedule/1 last accessed on 3rd October, 2022