Published on: 05th May 2026
Authored by: Preksha Sarda
Dr. Babasaheb ambedkar marathwada university, Aurangabad
Introduction
The death penalty, also known as capital punishment, remains one of the most debated aspects of criminal jurisprudence in India. While many countries have abolished it, India continues to retain the death penalty for the “rarest of rare” cases. The constitutional validity of the death penalty has been repeatedly challenged before the judiciary, primarily on the grounds of violation of fundamental rights under Articles 14, 19, and 21 of the Constitution of India.
Historical Background and Legal Framework
The concept of capital punishment in India dates back to ancient times and continued through colonial rule under the Indian Penal Code, 1860. Section 302 of the IPC prescribes death or life imprisonment as punishment for murder. Section 354(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 mandates that life imprisonment is the rule and death penalty is an exception, requiring special reasons for its imposition.
Constitutional Challenges
The death penalty has been challenged on grounds of violation of Article 21 (Right to Life), Article 14 (Right to Equality), and as being cruel and inhuman punishment. Critics argue that it leads to arbitrariness and violates human dignity.
Judicial Pronouncements
In Jagmohan Singh v. State of Uttar Pradesh (1973), the Supreme Court upheld the validity of the death penalty. In Bachan Singh v. State of Punjab (1980), the Court introduced the “rarest of rare” doctrine, restricting its use. Machhi Singh v. State of Punjab (1983) further elaborated this doctrine.
Procedural Safeguards
The judiciary has developed safeguards including fair trial, consideration of mitigating factors, and the right to mercy petitions under Articles 72 and 161. In Shatrughan Chauhan v. Union of India (2014), delay in mercy petitions was recognized as a ground for commutation.
Arguments in Favour
Supporters argue that the death penalty acts as a deterrent, ensures retributive justice, and protects society from dangerous offenders.
Arguments Against
Opponents highlight lack of deterrence, risk of wrongful convictions, and violation of human rights. There is also concern about disproportionate impact on marginalized communities.
Conclusion
The constitutional validity of the death penalty in India is upheld but restricted through the “rarest of rare” doctrine. While safeguards exist, debates on morality, fairness, and human rights continue, leaving scope for future reconsideration.
