RG Kar Rape Case: Reasons Behind Denial of Death Penalty to Convict

RG Kar Rape Case: Reasons Behind Denial of Death Penalty to Convict

A Kolkata court recently sentenced a convict to life imprisonment for the rape and murder of a doctor at RG Kar Medical College and Hospital. Despite the Central Bureau of Investigation’s (CBI) compelling argument for the death penalty, the court chose not to impose it.

This decision aligns with the landmark ruling in the Bachan Singh vs. State of Punjab (1980) case, where the Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of the death penalty but restricted its use to the "rarest of rare" cases. The judgment emphasized that courts must weigh both aggravating and mitigating circumstances before imposing such a sentence.

---

Understanding Aggravating and Mitigating Circumstances
Courts rely on aggravating (enhancing severity) and mitigating (reducing severity) factors to decide sentences, particularly in cases involving capital punishment.

• Aggravating Factors:
  1. Premeditated, calculated, and excessively brutal murders.
  2. Crimes involving exceptional cruelty or depravity.
  3. Killing public servants, law enforcement, or military personnel on duty.
• Mitigating Factors:
  1. The offender was under extreme mental or emotional distress.
  2. Age: Being very young or elderly may favor leniency.
  3. Potential for rehabilitation and societal reintegration.
  4. Actions driven by the influence or orders of others.
  5. Mental incapacity to recognize the criminality of the act.

---

Evolution of Aggravating and Mitigating Principles Post-Bachan Singh

• Age as a Factor:
  Cases like Ramnaresh vs. State of Chhattisgarh (2012) and Ramesh vs. State of Rajasthan (2011) emphasized youth as a mitigating factor, reflecting a belief in rehabilitation. Conversely, Shankar Kisanrao Khade vs. State of Maharashtra (2013) highlighted inconsistencies in sentencing related to age.
• Nature of the Crime:
  The Machhi Singh vs. State of Punjab (1983) judgment introduced the concept of societal “collective conscience,” prioritizing the gravity of the offense over the offender’s personal circumstances.
• Possibility of Reform:
  In Santosh Bariyar vs. State of Maharashtra (2009), the Supreme Court mandated evidence showing that the convict was beyond rehabilitation before imposing a death sentence.
• Separate Sentencing Hearings:
  Following Bachan Singh, courts are required to conduct a separate post-conviction hearing to assess whether the death penalty is appropriate. In Dattaraya vs. State of Maharashtra (2020), the lack of such a hearing led to commuting a death sentence to life imprisonment.

---

The Death Penalty in India

• Definition:
  Capital punishment is the severest form of penalty, irreversible after execution.
• Legal Framework:
  The Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023, and other statutes prescribe the death penalty for heinous crimes, including:
  • Rape resulting in death (Section 66).
  • Gang rape of minors (Section 70(2)).
  • Serial rapes (Section 71).
  • Murder (Section 302).
  • Terrorism (UAPA, 1967).
  • Specific drug trafficking offenses under the NDPS Act, 1985.

---

Key Supreme Court Rulings on Capital Punishment

• Jagmohan Singh Case (1972): Affirmed the death penalty’s constitutionality if due process was observed.
• Shatrughan Chauhan Case (2014): Prolonged delays in executions can justify commuting the death penalty to life imprisonment.
• Manoj vs. State of Maharashtra (2022): Directed thorough consideration of mitigating factors for balanced sentencing.
• Suo Motu Writ on Death Penalty (2022): The SC referred to a larger bench the question of ensuring a “meaningful opportunity” to argue against the death penalty.

---

Law Commission’s Views on the Death Penalty

• 35th Report (1967): Strongly endorsed capital punishment.
• 187th Report (2003): Highlighted procedural flaws but did not recommend abolition.
• 262nd Report (2015): Advocated abolishing the death penalty for all crimes except terrorism-related offenses.

---

Global Perspective on the Death Penalty

As of 2022:

• 55 countries retained the death penalty, with some restricting its application to exceptional crimes like mass killings or war crimes.
• 112 countries had abolished it completely, compared to only 48 in 1991.
• Countries like Kazakhstan, Sierra Leone, and Papua New Guinea abolished it recently, while others limited its application.
• The majority of executions occurred in China, Iran, Pakistan, Sudan, and the U.S., accounting for 91% of global executions.

---

Key Takeaways
The judiciary in India has evolved a nuanced approach to capital punishment, emphasizing procedural fairness and balancing the nature of the crime against the potential for rehabilitation. While the death penalty remains part of the legal framework, its application is increasingly guided by considerations of justice, humanity, and the rule of law.

Mind Sprint