Abstract
Although there are numerous countries that proscribe death sentences, there is no international consensus till date regarding its legality. The Indian legal system too, has struggled with the constitutionality of death penalty and with delineating the circumstances in which it may be granted. For instance, it is true that the legendary case, Mithu v. State of Punjab, struck down mandatory death sentences under the Indian Penal Code, but mandatory death sentences provided under specific criminal legislations such as the Arms Act are still contested. It is this uneasiness in the approach of the Indian legal system to capital punishment that Justice S.B. Sinha explores in this article. Providing a conceptual, historic overview of the Indian position of law, he explores the avatars of the Bachan Singh 'rarest of rare' test, how trial processes in India are prone to mistakes and the problem of convicts sentenced to death languishing on death row due to delays in execution. Justice S.B. Sinha concludes by observing that the Indian judiciary is becoming more reluctant to award the death sentence as there is greater emphasis on alternative modes of punishment and to the international legal developments which militate against capital punishment.
Recommended Citation
Sinha, S. B.
(2012)
"To Kill or Not to Kill: The Unending Conundrum,"
National Law School of India Review: Vol. 24:
Iss.
1, Article 11.
Available at:
https://repository.nls.ac.in/nlsir/vol24/iss1/11
