When more than 150 countries across the world, including neighbouring Nepal, have abolished the death penalty, should India also abolish itIJ This was the topic of discussion on the last day of a two-day national seminar here where legal luminaries discussed various facets of the penalty. Capital punishment is now prevailing in countries like India, the USA and China.
No definite conclusion emerged from the discussions, and judges of several High Courts urged the presiding officers of trial courts to apply all correct principles before awarding death penalty. Since the death penalty is constitutionally acceptable, the trial courts should be brave enough and decide the cases purely on its merit, opined the judges.
Terming the debate as “perennial”, Justice RR Tripathy of the Gujarat High Court said the Indian judiciary is passing through the most testing phase now. The ongoing debate on death penalty is more vibrant because “the judiciary is now under the vigilant eye of media scrutiny”, he said.
Urging the judicial officers to update their knowledge with the latest judgements of the Supreme Court, Justice Tripathy said, “Society is now very dynamic and, therefore, the judiciary has to be equally dynamic in pronouncing its judgements without giving the slightest opportunity to be criticided.”
Beginning the discussions, Justice SK Mishra of the Odisha High Court was of the opinion that when he was heading a trial court over a decade ago, he thought capital punishment was okay and a deterrent measure. But he was candid enough to admit that he has a different view now.
Senior judge of Odisha High Court and Chairman of Odisha State legal Services Authority Justice PK Mohanty, referring to several judgements of the Supreme Court, said “... life sentence is the rule while death penalty is an exception.”
Justice VM Kanade of the Bombay High Court was of the opinion that the sentencing system in the Indian judiciary cannot be put in a straightjacket formula and judges should not be robots. “Since the judiciary system exists for public satisfaction, public outcry and public furore cannot be forgotten especially after the Nirbhaya case last year,” he said.
Former Supreme Court judge SB Sinha threw a poser to the delegates as to how many of them agree to the CBI plea for a death penalty to Talwar couples in the Aarushi murder case. When the conference hall of the Odisha Judicial Academy here echoed a loud ‘no’, Sinha asserted that death penalty should not be given in a case which is being decided purely on circumstantial evidences.
He said if the judiciary doesn’t like Parliament to interfere in the sentencing system then the judiciary must correct itself so as to avoid the “miscarriage” of justice in any case.