Time to re-think Capital Punishment: A regressive approach

The following article is written by Rashmi Bishnoi, a 3rd year law student of Jindal Global Law School.

“An eye for an eye will make the whole world blind”

..Mahatama Gandhi

At the United Nations where majority of countries said that it was time to abolish the death penalty. India along with several south Asian nations voted against the resolution and argued in favour of death penalty. Till now, death penalty is continued to be imposed in the rarest of the rare cases but I contend that it should be abolished exhaustively for it to not only be barbaric, immoral and unconstitutional but also a regressive approach in a civilized world.

Review Petitions in Death Sentence Cases not to be by Circulation; only in Open Court & by Bench of atleast Three Judges

  

"When it comes to death penalty cases, we feel that the power of spoken word has to be given yet another opportunity even if the ultimate success rate is minimal."

A five-judge bench of the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India, headed by Chief Justice R.M. Lodha, by 4-1 majority, in the case of Mohd. Arif @ Ashfaq vs. The Registrar Supreme Court of India & Ors. threw to the wind its approx. 60-year-old rule  and held that hearing of Review Petitions of convicts on death row should not be by circulation but should only be in open Court. The Hon’ble Court further held that hearing of matters in which a death sentence has been passed should be by a Bench of at least three Supreme Court Judges. The majority Judgement was drafted by Hon’ble Justice R.F.Nariman while the dissenting opinion was passed by Justice Chelameshar.

Full text of Judgement can be found here.