Death Penalty In India: Constitutional Validity And The Debate On Abolition
Mr. Aditya Sanjay Gadave, LLM, Department of Law, Shri. Navalmal Firodia Law College, Pune
ABSTRACT
Every human has a right to live life with dignity. No person can live without right which guarantees the life and liberty. In the absence of right to life the authority may turn into anarchy. In the Constitution of India, Article 21 guarantees the right to life and liberty for every citizen within the territory of India. Every right come along with certain reasonable restrictions. The death punishment comes under the purview of right to life. It violates the dignity and life of the person. The Indian legal framework permits the capital punishment for heinous offences which is brutal and inhumane in nature. The execution of the capital punishment is subject to the constitutional safeguards and judicial scrutiny. The Supreme Court of India recognised that the death penalty cannot be imposed as routine practice. It has developed as by the doctrine of ‘rarest of rare’ to guide its application. This doctrine strikes the balance between social interest of the society, the rights of the accused and need for justice in grave offences. The main concern about unfair sentences, wrongful conviction, delay in execution and the permanent nature of the capital punishment has increased the debate over a period. This article examines the constitutional validity of the death penalty in India with specific focus on Article 14 and 21 of the Constitution. It also analyses the judicial approach, sentencing principle, human right concerns and argument surrounding to retention and abolition of the sentence.
