CAPITAL PUNISHMENT: TO ABOLISH OR NOT
THE LAWWAY WITH LAWYERS JOURNAL VOLUME:-27 ISSUE NO:- 27 , SEPTEMBER 5, 2025 ISSN (ONLINE):- 2584-1106 Website: www.the lawway with lawyers.com Email: thelawwaywithelawyers@gmail.com Authored By : Janvi Goyal CAPITAL PUNISHMENT: TO ABOLISH OR NOT ABSTRACT This article provides a critical examination of the ongoing debate regarding capital punishment, analysing both the arguments in favour of and against its continued application. It explores the historical context, assesses legal and moral viewpoints, and reviews the current status of the death penalty in India and worldwide. Utilizing landmark judicial rulings, statistical data, international human rights standards, and philosophical perspectives, the article underscores the complexities associated with the implementation of the death penalty within a modern justice system. Additionally, it addresses the sociological, economic, and psychological effects of executions. Ultimately, the article advocates for a transition toward more humane alternatives, such as life imprisonment without the possibility of parole, with a focus on rehabilitation and human dignity. The discussion seeks to offer a comprehensive understanding of the question of whether capital punishment should be abolished or maintained in contemporary society. KEYWORDS Human Dignity, Death Penalty, Executions, Life Imprisonment An Examination of Law, Morality, and Justice in Modern Society INTRODUCTION Capital punishment, commonly referred to as the death penalty, has historically been one of the most contentious and debated topics within the realm of criminal justice. The ongoing debate regarding its abolition or retention continues to provoke intense arguments from both perspectives. This article examines the historical evolution of capital punishment, the ethical and legal arguments supporting and opposing it, the current status of capital punishment in India and worldwide, and ultimately tackles the critical question: should capital punishment be abolished or maintained? HISTORICAL BACKGROUND The death penalty was mandated for a wide range of offenses in ancient civilizations such as Rome, Greece, and Babylon, where capital punishment originated. The Hammurabi Code and Roman Law are examples of codes that mandated execution for offenses ranging from theft to murder. Different methods of execution were utilized throughout time, such as beheading, hanging, and deadly injection. Public executions were commonplace in mediaeval and early modern Europe, where they were viewed as a deterrent. References to the death penalty can be found in both religious literature and legislative codes from ancient India. The death sentence was a fundamental component of the Indian Penal Code of 1860 during British colonial control. India kept the death sentence after gaining independence, but only in the “rarest of rare cases.” ARGUMENTS SUPPORTING CAPITAL PUNISHMENT Deterrence: A key argument advocating for capital punishment is its role as a deterrent. Supporters contend that the fear of execution prevents potential offenders from engaging in serious crimes. They assert that life imprisonment may not provide the same level of deterrence as the death penalty. Retribution and Justice: Proponents argue that capital punishment functions as a means of retributive justice, offering a sense of closure and justice to victims and their families. In accordance with the retributive theory of punishment, it is asserted that the criminal should be penalized in proportion to the severity of the offense committed. The death penalty is perceived as a method of delivering justice for particularly heinous and brutal crimes. Societal Protection: Capital punishment makes sure that criminals who pose a threat are permanently removed from society. This rules out any chance that the perpetrator will commit additional crimes, whether while incarcerated or following their release. The death penalty ensures public safety, according to some, while life imprisonment without parole nevertheless runs the risk of parole or escape. Cost Effectiveness: Because the state is spared the long-term expenses of incarceration, some supporters contend that the death penalty is more economical than life in prison. Because judicial proceedings involving death sentence cases frequently necessitate drawn-out appeals and costly trials, this argument is still debatable. ARGUMENTS AGAINST CAPITAL PUNISHMENT The Risk of Wrongful Convictions: A significant argument opposing capital punishment is the potential for executing innocent people. Judicial mistakes, biases, and insufficient legal representation can result in wrongful convictions. Once an execution occurs, it cannot be undone, and the ramifications of a wrongful conviction are devastating. Human Rights and Ethical Considerations: Critics contend that capital punishment infringes upon the fundamental human right to life. They assert that the state should not possess the authority to take an individual’s life, irrespective of the offense committed. International human rights organizations, including Amnesty International, have consistently advocated for the elimination of the death penalty. Lack of Deterrent Effect: The effectiveness of the death penalty as a deterrent is also called into question by its opponents. Statistical evidence and studies have demonstrated that life imprisonment is not necessarily any less effective in deterring crime than the death penalty. The fact that many nations with reduced crime rates do not use the death penalty indicates that other elements have a greater impact on lowering crime. Discrimination and Unequal Application: The death penalty is frequently criticised for disproportionately targeting economically disadvantaged and marginalised populations. Racial, socioeconomic, and regional differences in its application have raised concerns. The justice system’s impartiality and fairness are called into question by this. LEGAL STATUS AND LANDMARK CASES IN INDIA In India, the constitutionality of the death penalty has faced numerous challenges. The pivotal case of Jagmohan Singh v. State of Uttar Pradesh affirmed the constitutionality of capital punishment, asserting that it did not infringe upon Articles 14, 19, and 21 of the Constitution. Nevertheless, the Supreme Court in Bachan Singh v. State of Punjab established the doctrine of the ‘rarest of rare’ cases, which significantly limited the application of the death penalty. The ruling in Machhi Singh v. State of Punjab further clarified the ‘rarest of rare’ doctrine, offering criteria for when the death penalty ought to be applied. More contemporary cases, such as Shatrughan Chauhan v. Union of India, have concentrated on the procedural elements of death penalty cases, including delays in execution and the mental health status of the condemned. INTERNATIONAL PERSPECTIVE The global movement toward the abolition of the