Death Penalty Jurisprudence Post-Bachan Singh
📘 1. Introduction: Bachan Singh Case and Its Impact
Bachan Singh v. State of Punjab (1980) 2 SCC 684 is the landmark judgment where the Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of the death penalty but laid down that it should be imposed only in the "rarest of rare" cases.
Key Principles in Bachan Singh:
Death penalty is not unconstitutional.
Should be imposed only in rarest of rare cases where:
Life imprisonment is inadequate,
The crime shocks the collective conscience of society.
Courts must consider mitigating and aggravating circumstances.
The sentencing process must be balanced and just.
⚖️ 2. Post-Bachan Singh Jurisprudence: Important Cases
✅ 1. Machhi Singh v. State of Punjab (1983) 3 SCC 470
Facts:
This case involved brutal murder and robbery by multiple accused.
Held:
The Supreme Court elaborated on "rarest of rare" doctrine and laid down factors for deciding death penalty, including:
Manner of commission,
Motive,
Anti-social or heinous nature,
Impact on society.
Significance:
Provided clear guidelines on when death penalty should be awarded, emphasizing judicial discretion.
✅ 2. Mithu v. State of Punjab (1983) 2 SCC 277
Facts:
Challenged Section 303 IPC which mandated death penalty for murder of a public servant.
Held:
Supreme Court struck down Section 303 IPC as unconstitutional because it removed judicial discretion.
Significance:
Confirmed that death penalty cannot be mandatory; courts must have discretion to impose life imprisonment instead.
✅ 3. Santosh Bariyar v. State of Maharashtra (2009) 6 SCC 498
Facts:
Appeal against death sentence for brutal murder.
Held:
Court reiterated that death penalty must be imposed only in rarest cases after considering aggravating and mitigating factors.
Significance:
Reaffirmed Bachan Singh principles emphasizing that the death penalty is an exception.
✅ 4. Shankar Kisanrao Khade v. State of Maharashtra (2013) 5 SCC 546
Facts:
Involved multiple murders by the accused.
Held:
SC commuted death sentence to life imprisonment because the circumstances did not meet “rarest of rare” threshold.
Significance:
Showed the importance of proportionality and individualised sentencing.
✅ 5. Santosh Kumar Satishbhushan Bariyar v. State of Maharashtra (2009) 6 SCC 498
Facts:
Appeal against death penalty for murder.
Held:
Supreme Court stressed that "rarest of rare" must be decided on facts and death penalty should be the last resort.
Significance:
Clarified that mitigating circumstances like age, background, or possibility of reform must be considered.
✅ 6. Rajendra Pralhadrao Wasnik v. State of Maharashtra (2010) 2 SCC 797
Facts:
Death penalty challenged for murder.
Held:
SC upheld death penalty because the crime was committed in a brutal manner, shocking societal conscience.
Significance:
Demonstrated that heinousness and societal impact are critical in awarding death penalty.
✅ 7. Soman v. State of Kerala (2018) 5 SCC 783
Facts:
Involved murder during dacoity.
Held:
Death sentence awarded as it met the “rarest of rare” test.
Significance:
Reaffirmed criteria from Machhi Singh and Bachan Singh, giving weight to brutality and cruelty.
🧠 3. Principles Governing Death Penalty Post-Bachan Singh
| Principle | Explanation |
|---|---|
| Rarest of rare doctrine | Death penalty only when life imprisonment is inadequate |
| Judicial discretion mandatory | Death penalty cannot be imposed mechanically or mandatorily |
| Consider mitigating circumstances | Age, background, possibility of reform, mental health |
| Consider aggravating circumstances | Brutality, premeditation, motive, impact on society |
| Proportionality and fairness | Sentencing must be proportionate to crime and circumstances |
| Safeguards against miscarriage | Automatic appeals, review, and mercy petitions |
🏁 4. Conclusion
Since the Bachan Singh judgment, India’s death penalty jurisprudence has evolved into a carefully balanced system that respects the sanctity of life, but allows capital punishment in the most extreme cases. Courts exercise cautious judicial discretion, ensuring:
Death penalty is not the norm but an exception,
Each case is evaluated on its own facts,
Both aggravating and mitigating factors are meticulously considered,
Procedural safeguards like mandatory appeals and mercy petitions exist to prevent wrongful execution
RELATED Blog
0 comments