Criminal Procedure In Death Penalty Cases
🧾 1. Introduction
The death penalty is the most severe form of punishment in criminal law. Its administration involves strict procedural safeguards because it is irreversible. The law mandates that capital punishment should only be imposed in the “rarest of rare” cases, balancing justice and humanity.
⚖️ Legal Framework in India
Constitution of India
Article 21: Guarantees the right to life and personal liberty; death penalty is an exception permitted by law.
Indian Penal Code (IPC)
Section 302: Punishment for murder (may include death penalty or life imprisonment)
Section 376(2), IPC: Rape with aggravating circumstances may attract death penalty
Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC), 1973
Sections 354–359 CrPC: Appeals and review mechanisms
Sentencing Principles
Supreme Court in Bachan Singh v. State of Punjab (1980) established the “rarest of rare” doctrine.
🧾 2. Criminal Procedure in Death Penalty Cases
Step 1: Investigation and Charges
Investigation under IPC/other statutes.
Arrest and collection of evidence.
Filing of charge sheet in the court.
Step 2: Trial in Sessions Court
Conducted by Sessions Judge.
Evidence, witness testimony, cross-examination.
Defense of mitigating factors: age, mental condition, circumstances.
Step 3: Sentencing
Judge considers:
Aggravating factors: brutality, premeditation, public outrage
Mitigating factors: youth, mental illness, provocation
Death penalty awarded only if life imprisonment is inadequate.
Step 4: Appeals
Mandatory appeal to High Court under Section 366 CrPC.
Court reviews:
Evidence, conviction, sentence
Whether case qualifies for “rarest of rare”
Step 5: Special Leave Petition (SLP) to Supreme Court
Defendant can file SLP under Article 136 Constitution.
Supreme Court reviews legality and proportionality.
Step 6: Review and Curative Petition
Review Petition (Article 137): Errors of law or judgment
Curative Petition: Last resort to prevent miscarriage of justice
Step 7: Mercy Petition
Filed to President of India under Article 72 or Governor under Article 161.
Considered on humanitarian grounds or legal errors.
📚 3. Key Case Law
Case 1: Bachan Singh v. State of Punjab (1980) 2 SCC 684
Facts:
Supreme Court considered whether the death penalty could be imposed for murder.
Held:
Introduced “rarest of rare” doctrine.
Death penalty imposed only when life imprisonment is inadequate.
Judge must weigh aggravating and mitigating circumstances.
Significance:
Foundation of capital punishment jurisprudence in India.
Case 2: Machhi Singh v. State of Punjab (1983) 3 SCC 470
Facts:
Gang murder involving extreme brutality.
Held:
Supreme Court applied rarest of rare doctrine.
Death penalty upheld because of pre-planned, gruesome crime.
Significance:
Illustrates aggravating factors justifying capital punishment.
Case 3: Santosh Kumar Singh v. State of NCT of Delhi (2010) 8 SCC 402
Facts:
Murder with sexual assault.
Held:
Death penalty awarded due to exceptional brutality and public outrage.
Supreme Court emphasized individualized sentencing.
Significance:
Reiterates need for proportionality and careful evaluation of circumstances.
Case 4: Shatrughan Chauhan v. Union of India (2014) 3 SCC 1
Facts:
Review of long-pending death row cases.
Held:
Delay in execution itself may be a mitigating factor.
Prolonged delay can convert death sentence to life imprisonment.
Significance:
Introduced principle of “delay as a ground for commutation”.
Case 5: Jagmohan Singh v. State of UP (1973) 1 SCC 20
Facts:
Murder in circumstances of public outrage.
Held:
Court emphasized deterrence and public safety in awarding death penalty.
But confirmed necessity of rarest of rare standard.
Significance:
Early case reinforcing balance between retribution and constitutional safeguards.
Case 6: Dinanath v. State of Maharashtra (1978) 3 SCC 59
Facts:
Convicted for murder with mitigating circumstances like mental instability.
Held:
Death penalty not imposed; life imprisonment awarded.
Significance:
Shows importance of considering mental condition and mitigating factors.
Case 7: Rajendra Prasad v. State of Uttar Pradesh (2001) 5 SCC 100
Facts:
Multiple murders committed during dacoity.
Held:
Supreme Court upheld death sentence citing extreme brutality and lack of remorse.
Significance:
Demonstrates application of “rarest of rare” doctrine in multiple murders.
⚖️ 4. Important Principles from Case Law
Rarest of Rare Doctrine – Death penalty only in extreme cases.
Weighing Aggravating vs. Mitigating Factors – Judge must justify sentence.
Mandatory Appeal – High Court review is essential.
Delay in Execution – Can be ground for commutation.
Mercy/Review/Curative Petition – Protects against miscarriage of justice.
🧩 5. Conclusion
Criminal procedure in death penalty cases is meticulously structured to balance justice, deterrence, and constitutional rights.
Trial courts focus on facts and circumstances.
High Court and Supreme Court ensure procedural correctness and proportionality.
Executive review (mercy petition) provides final humanitarian safeguard.
The combined effect of these safeguards ensures capital punishment is rare, justified, and fair.
RELATED Blog
0 comments