I believe no one should ever take another's life.

Just because that person decided to do

something wrong and immoral does not mean we should mimic that action and do the same
things. No matter the reason or how you look at it, killing someone is always wrong. Even if
they think it's to help others.

JUDICIAL REVIEW: A Look at Some of The Landmark Cases

The awarding death penalty has been one of the most controversial topics of all time. There have
been various cases, but the following 3 cases are landmark cases regarding the death penalty.

1. Jagmohan Singh v. State of Uttar Pradesh (1973)

2. Bachan Singh v. State of Punjab (1980)
3. Machhi Singh v. State of Punjab (1983)
4. The Jagmohan Singh cases was important because it challenged the constitutionality of
the death penalty. The Supreme Court stated that while analysing Article 21 and Article
72 of the Constitution, it cannot be said that capital sentence was regarded per se
unreasonable or not in the public interest.Thus, SC upheld that death penalty can be
attributed in various crimes. However, an amendment was made in CrPC, which changed
the death penalty from being the norm to an exception.

2. In 1980, in the case of Bachan Singh v. State of Punjab, the Supreme Court again
upheld the constitutionality of the death penalty. The Court laid down that “for persons
convicted of murder, life imprisonment is the rule and death sentence an exception”. The
phrase “rarest of the rare” was firstly promulgated in this case and is used till date.
3. The Machchi Singh case is important because it was in this case that the Supreme
Court laid down the criteria which would make cases “the rarest of rare” and thus could
invite the death penalty.

Advantages and disadvantages

Advantages

 Some argue that the punishment which is to be given to a criminal must be dependent on
the gravity of the crime which he has committed. For example, if someone has committed
a crime like murder or rape, then that person must be given a death penalty because the
crime which he has committed is of a very grave nature. The propagators are often of the
view that giving death penalty would set an example for other criminals, and thus, it
would act as a deterrent, and others who are likely to commit such crimes would refrain
from doing so, because of the fear of losing their life. Thus, this would definitely help in
reducing the crime rate in society.
 The next point is that the criminal, who has committed such a heinous crime, might re-
indulge himself in the same crime, or any other heinous crime after he has served his
term of imprisonment and has been released. Thus instead of giving him imprisonment, if
he is awarded a death penalty, the society would not be under threat from such person.
Thus to prevent the happening of any such crime, the offender must be given the death
penalty. However, this logic seems appropriate only to punish serial killers or those who
 have been regular offenders and usually indulge themselves in one or other form of crime
in everyday situations.
 Another possible explanation which would support awarding the death sentence is the
torture which is very prevalent in jails, either by the jail officials or the fellow-criminals.
It is also argued that those who are awarded the life imprisonment, are left with no other
option but to live a futile life behind the bars, and hence, it is better to award them the
death penalty.
 Another point is that imprisoning someone is far more expensive than executing him.
This, however, cannot be said to be justified to execute every criminal, but only to those
who are repeated offenders and are likely to commit heinous crimes in future also.
 The death penalty is sometimes equated as revenge for pain and suffering that the
criminal inflicted on the victim. The proponents of the application of death penalty,
argues that those who have taken other person’s life does not have a right to live and
hence must be executed. This also attaches an emotional point attached to it, the family
members of the victims sense a feeling of justice if such criminals are executed and are
left open in the society, so as to commit other crimes.
 Another point is regarding the safety of fellow prison inmates and guards. Criminals who
have committed heinous crimes like murder, and are serving their life-imprisonment
sentence, are believed to have a violent personality, and such criminals may, in future,
attack someone during imprisonment.

The abovementioned points emphasize the importance of death penalty for the safety and
betterment of human society. However, there are others who believe that it is an immoral and
unethical act of violence.

Disadvantages

 The first and foremost point is that if we execute a criminal, there will not be any
difference between us and the criminal who has committed the horrifying crime. As
terminating the life of the criminal would not terminate the crime itself.
 Awarding capital punishment cannot always be said to be just and appropriate. Those
who are not financially sound and cannot afford a good lawyer have to succumb to the
death penalty while those who can easily afford good lawyers as they have plenty of
money are less likely to be awarded a death penalty, as they usually employ best amongst
the lawyers to defend their case. Thus, this doesn’t seems to be just and thus capital
punishment must be abolished completely, so as to eradicate this disparity in this society.
 The crimes are related to the psychology of an individual, and not giving him a second
chance seems to be unfair. Thus, it can be said that imprisoning a person is always a
better option than to execute him because the criminal may realise his wrongful act and
might want to change himself.
 Not all convictions which take place are correct; sometimes an innocent person may be
wrongly convicted of some heinous crime, which in reality was never committed by him.
There are instances in our country, where persons who are convicted are later found to be
innocent, and hence, their conviction is revoked, but if based on such conviction the
person is executed, this would be a gross injustice and hence must be prevented.
  It is also argued that the there is no relation between the death penalty and crime rate.
Executing criminals by awarding death penalty does not decrease crime rate in the
society. Crimes are still prevalent in countries where the death penalty exists and thus it
cannot be said that death penalty would curb the happening of the crimes.

The Supreme Court has, in various cases, declared that the death penalty should not be
declared unconstitutional, because the framers of the Constitution hasn’t seen it fit to do so,
and that the legislature also hasn’t taken any steps to abolish the death penalty.

However, there are various arguments which contend for abolishing the death penalty. The
emotional stigma of revenge would lead us nowhere else than in a cycle of violence and the
sadness. Thus, in my view, executing criminals by awarding them death penalty should be
abolished and that there is no place in the modern world for such killings by the State, and
that India should abolish the death penalty as soon as possible.