Bachan Singh v. State of Punjab was a landmark case in the history of India, which dealt with the constitutionality of the death penalty. The case was heard by a five-judge bench of the Supreme Court of India, and the judgment was delivered on 9 May 1980.
Facts:
Bachan Singh was convicted for the murder of two persons and was awarded the death penalty by the trial court. His appeal against the sentence was rejected by the High Court of Punjab and Haryana. Bachan Singh then approached the Supreme Court challenging the constitutional validity of the death penalty.
Arguments:
Bachan Singh’s counsel argued that the death penalty was violative of the right to life guaranteed under Article 21 of the Indian Constitution. The counsel submitted that the death penalty was cruel, inhuman and degrading, and that it had not proved to be a deterrent to crime. The counsel also argued that the death penalty was arbitrary and could be awarded in an arbitrary manner.
The prosecution argued that the death penalty was a necessary punishment for heinous crimes, and that it served as a deterrent to potential offenders. The prosecution submitted that the death penalty was awarded in rare cases where the crime was of an exceptional nature, and that it was not awarded arbitrarily.
Judgment:
The Supreme Court held that the death penalty was not violative of Article 21 of the Indian Constitution, and that it was a constitutionally valid punishment. However, the Court laid down certain guidelines to be followed while awarding the death penalty, to ensure that it was not awarded in an arbitrary manner. The Court held that the death penalty could only be awarded in the “rarest of rare” cases, where the crime was of an exceptional nature and where the alternative punishment would be inadequate.
Personal opinion:
The Bachan Singh case was a crucial moment in the history of the Indian criminal justice system, as it laid down guidelines for the awarding of the death penalty. While the death penalty remains a contentious issue, the guidelines laid down by the Court have ensured that the death penalty is not awarded in an arbitrary manner. The “rarest of rare” doctrine ensures that the death penalty is awarded only in cases where the crime is of an exceptional nature, and where the alternative punishment would be inadequate. This has helped to ensure that the death penalty is not used as a routine punishment, and that it is reserved for the most serious crimes