FACTS IN BRIEF : - One Bachan Singh was tried and convicted and sentenced to death under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) for the murder of Desa Singh, Durga Bai and Veeran Bai. The death penalty imposed on him was confirmed by the High Court. Appealing by special leave, he (along with other prisoners) challenged the constitutional validity of the death penalty provided in the Section and the sentencing procedure provided in Section 354(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.
ARGUMENTS:- It was argued by the Appellant that the imposition of death penalty under Section 302 of IPC, read with Section 354 (3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure was arbitrary and unreasonable because
(a) it was cruel and inhuman, disproportionate and excessive,
(b) it was totally unnecessary and did not serve any social purpose or advance any constitutional value and
(c) the discretion conferred on the court to award death penalty was not guided by any policy or principle laid down by the legislature but was wholly arbitrary. On the other hand, the same was defended by the State that the question of constitutional validity of the death penalty had stood concluded by the decision of a Constitution Bench of five Judges in Jagmohan Singh v. State of U.P. ( AIR 1973 SC 947) and it could not therefore be allowed to be re-agitated. It was also submitted that
(a) death penalty was neither cruel or inhuman, neither disproportionate nor excessive,
(b) it did serve a social purpose inasmuch as it fulfils two penological goals namely, denunciation by the community and deterrence and
(c) that the judicial discretion in awarding death penalty was not arbitrary and the court could always evolve standards or norms for the purpose of guiding the exercise of its discretion in this punitive area.
JUDGMENT:- The Apex Court dismissed the challenge to the constitutionality of Section 302 of IPC in so far as it provided for the death sentence and also the challenge to the constitutionality of Section 354(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The Court propounded the principle of “rarest of rare cases” in awarding of the death penalty wherein it was stated by the Court that a real and abiding concern for the dignity of human life postulated a resistance to taking a life through law's instrumentality. However, that ought not to be done save in the rarest of rare cases when the alternative option is unquestionably foreclosed. Therefore the constitutionality of the provisions imposing death penalty was upheld
FOR COMMON MAN:- The apex court laid down the doctrine of “rarest of rare case” for the purposes of awarding of death penalty. Thus the case laid down a strong foundation for sorting out an extraordinary case with prevailing special circumstances, whereupon death penalty be imposed on the accused, his case being a rarest of rare one. Thus a significant limitation on the arbitrary imposition death penalty was solidifying in the form of the “rarest of rare” principle which has now become the yardstick for awarding death penalty by Indian Judiciary.
0 Comments