Principles of Death Penalty
Author – Dishita Singh
College – Amity University Mumbai
TO THE POINT:
The case matter arose from a series of brutal and premeditated murder committed by Macchi Singh and his associates, resulting in the death of seventeen individuals in developing a more concrete framework for identifying cases that warrant such extreme punishment which emphasized the questions imposed regarding death penalty which focuses on circumstances and factors that should be involved during imposing death penalty.
A manner of commission of murder and nature of crime with certain magnitude and personality of victim raised the practical guidelines to look out whether it comes under ‘rarest of rare doctrine’, the court also focused on the concept of collective conscience of society, which means if the accused not put to death of rigorous crime, what will be the moral restraint of society? Does the collective conscience will permit us to let him live? Well, the court emphasized more on structure principles rather than passion.
USE OF LEGAL JARGON:
Legality used under this case as the matter remains debated regarding the Constitutional rights of an individual that is Article 21 defines no person shall be deprived of his life or personal liberty except according to procedure established by law, also Article 14 talks about equality before law and equal protection of law in relation to this it helps to determine whether death penalty given is harming the personal liberty or whether applied arbitrarily. Other statutory provisions include Section 302, IPC – punishment for murder which is death or imprisonment for life.
Section 149, IPC – Constructive liability of every member of an unlawful assembly for acts done in prosecution of the common object.
Section 354(3), CPC – Mandates that courts should record special reason whenever death penalty is given.
The rarest of rare doctrine that emphasized on the principle for court to determine whether the death penalty should be imposed or not that the nature of crime must be exceptional brutal that shocks the conscience of the society.
These are factors that are considered while using this doctrine: –
1)Aggravating factors which weigh towards the death penalty consist of the manner act committed, the Motive behind the act, the vulnerability of the victim during the act, the magnitude of crime means how big and serious it is.
2)Mitigating Factors which weigh towards life imprisonment consist of background of the accused means what state of mind, social and economic pressure, the age or other personality traits that may have influenced crime and other probability of change, the offender can go for rehabilitation or show any sign of remorse or guilt after committing an act.
THE PROOF:
Judiciary upholds and emphasizes the operationalization the rarest of rare doctrine that courts must lookout the collective impact of the crime on the community and death penalty generally considered appropriate when life imprisonment option is unquestionably closed. In the case matter two foundational question before the courts were considered.
1) Is the crime so exceptional and different in nature no that other punishment can be considered?
2) Mitigating circumstances fully observed and balanced, even after this the matter demands ultimate penalty?
Both question when answered positive that crime is rare in nature and mitigating circumstances are either not there or outweighed by aggravating factors then death sentence be imposed. The weighing process is always the qualitative and assessing the totality of crime and circumstances and always the conscience of society not the passion or emotions.Judiciary always considers the death penalty as an exception because the implication of this principle is that the burden firmly depends upon the prosecution to demonstrate and court to firmly lookout all factors to find the justified reasons or else the life imprisonment is always the adequate rule for the punishment.
ABSTRACT
The case evolves around the Machi Singh and his group committed brutal act of revenge against a family resulting in murder of seventeen individuals, this act executed in the manner that shocked the morality of society and hence court observed the factors that concerned appropriate for punishment.
The consideration of factors related to death penalty is essential to apply as already explained above. The concern and debate are about the reflection of deep constitutional and Humanitarian commitment to the sanity of human life. The court do recognise the state power to take an individual life is a most excessive step of sovereign power and therefore must be ensured a dept caution and circumstances that allows to do it. Criticism ongoing regarding the human rights and no backings of the given strict statistical definition of the doctrine ‘rarest of rare’ the parameters that depends on individual discretion and inconsistencies regarding perspective of presiding judges in death penalty sentences. Now at present the court introduced a three test, first is ‘crime test’ measures the intensity of crime, ‘criminal test’ considers the mitigating circumstances and possibility of change lastly ‘rarest of rare test’ doctrine, thus court ensure fair and balanced approach.
CASE LAWS:
1)Bachan Singh Vs State of Punjab (AIR 1980 SC 898): The case established the rarest of rare doctrine but also upheld the validity of death penalty under the constitutional right Article 21.
2)Santosh Kumar Satishbhushan Bariyar Vs State of Maharashtra (AIR 2009 6 SSC 498): The Supreme Court emphasized that the court giving death sentences should primarily focuses on the mitigating factors and burden lies on prosecution to prove that accused act is cruel and beyond change.
3)Shankar Kisanrao Khade Vs State of Maharashtra (AIR 2013 5 SCC 546): The case established three essential test which is crime test, criminal test and rarest of rare to further structure sentencing related to death penalty.
4)Rajendra Prahladrao Wasnik Vs State of Maharashtra (AIR 2012 4 SCC 37): The case directed the personality checks giving importance to aggravating factors before sentencing in capital cases.
CONCLUSION:
Hence, the observation when analysed regarding the death penalty the factors to determine remains the same from the very first ruling case till now present matters just giving it more structural form to ensure that sovereignty and constitutional right of an individual is not harmed because of state power and court perspective. Now there’s remains the unanswered questions depends upon the nature of case but the firm boundary for sentencing death penalty should and justified ground and cogent reason to implement it.
FAQ:
1) Why does this type of cases is referred as capital cases?
– This Term was derived from the word Caput which means head and also this crime are so much rigorous in nature that it distinguishes the other offences from it and carry the possibility of death sentence. In legal system this type of case proceedings receive special procedure and specific Appellate courts where the ultimate option remains to give is the death penalty.
2) Does the doctrine justify the enough reason for death penalty?
– Yes , it does and accepted in our legal Indian jurisprudence because doctrine already states that it’s last option and exception in an extreme case where life imprisonment is unquestionable.
3) Is there should be change in factors considered for sentencing death penalty?
– It’s debated , but as per opinions of legal experts now the focus is shifted to evaluation of clear psychology and psychiatric which state pre existing mental health to determine offender psychological issues , this assessment also needed beyond the criminal procedures as well to clearly have the inferences . The socio and cultural upbringing factors means his past of his present live and whether the offender is reformative.
