Email
Print
ShareThe principle of 'rarest of the rare' that governs judiciary to determine whether a murder accused should be sent to the gallows also allows enough discretion to judges to say however cold blooded a murder or a series of murders, the accused can't be sentenced to death.
Between 1950 and 1980, at least 4,000 convicts were executed in India. The figure saw a steep drop between 1980 and 1987 when hangmen pulled the rope for only three convicts. No person was hanged thereafter, but for a rape and murder convict who was executed in Kolkata Jail in 2005.
In fact, there's been a growing demand for converting 'term imprisonment' into a period that lasts till the accused is dead. That would serve twin purposes: The convict's family wouldn't be punished to see him dead prematurely, and the convict would suffer incarceration in the real sentence of the term. It's said there's no bigger punishment than depriving a human being of his liberty.
Gradually, the Supreme Court (SC) has started explaining the term 'life imprisonment' in a manner that doesn't allow the political executive to exercise the legislative power to grant pardon. Last year, in the case of Karnataka-based 'sadhu' Swamy Shraddhananda, who killed and raped many disciples, SC said if it found the death sentence even slightly disproportionate to the offence committed, it could refrain from awarding the capital punishment. But 14 years would also be unjust in such a case, and the option left would be to reduce the vast gap between life imprisonment and death.
When there is a good, strong basis for the court to substitute death by life or by a term in excess of 14 years, it could direct that the convict be incarcerated for the rest of his life. This will take care of the objections of both the adversaries and protagonists of capital punishment.
