Introduction:
There is no straight procedure for the implementation of ‘the rarest of rare doctrines.’ In a criminal case, the trial consists of two primary aspects, one of which is the nature and extent of the crime. The severity of the penalty may be worked out on the basis of the two basics. The Judiciary of India is committed to seeking some kind of balance between, on the one hand, the frustrating and amplifying circumstances and, on the other hand, the appeal of the general public, and, on the other side, to adding the grounds, should be exceptionally sound so that there is no other alternative than the death penalty. In recent times, the Supreme Court of India has upheld the death penalty granted to the accused in the Nirbhaya rape-cum-murder case after finding it the “rarest of rare cases” and has awarded scandalous discipline to ensure justice. In India, the “rarest of rare” law is the measuring stick of the death penalty.
Capital Punishment in India
India allows capital punishment for a variety of serious crimes.
However, the attempt to impose capital punishment is not always the possibility followed by the execution of a transfer to life imprisonment. Capital punishment, also known as the death penalty, is the action of an offender to death sentenced on conviction by a court of law for a criminal offence. It is the highest punishment to be imposed on the accused. It is usually awarded in exceptionally serious cases of murder, kidnapping, treason, etc.
The death penalty is perceived to be the most acceptable punishment and effective defence for the worst crimes. However, those who reject it see it as cruel and barbaric. The morality of the death penalty is also controversial, and there are many criminologists and socialists all over the world. They have been seeking the abolition of the death penalty for a long time.
What is Rarest of Rare?
In 1980, in the case of Bachan Singh, the Supreme Court introduced the “rarest of rare” doctrine and, since then, life imprisonment is the rule and death sentences are the exceptions.
There is no proper legal definition of ‘rarest of rare’. It is based on the facts and circumstances of the particular case, and nature and conduct of crime of the defendant, the history of his or her involvement in the crime, the probability of his or her reform and integration into society, etc. Rarest of rare is a concept that has been adopted to make it easier for the courts to choose between the death penalty and life imprisonment as a penalty for the crime of murder.
Two Factors of “rarest of rare”
The “Rarest of rare’ principle can be divided into two Factors:-
- Aggravating circumstances
- Mitigating circumstances
The major difference between these two is that, in the event of aggravating circumstances, the judge can impose a death penalty on him, but the Bench may not issue the death sentence in the rarest cases. The Judiciary of India is obliged to discover the right balance between, on the one hand, mitigating and aggravating conditions and, on the other side, the appeal of society.
Emergence of ‘Rarest of Rare’ Principle
Indian laws do not have a favourable view of the death penalty, nor do they fully deter it. A few examples, such as section 302, Section 121 Section 364A etc. of IPC(Indian penal code) 1860. Commission of Sati (Prevention) Act 1987, NDPS Act 1985, Army Act, Bombay Prohibition Act 2009, Prevention of Terrorism Act 2002 etc. prescribing crimes punishable by death.
In the case of Jagmohan Singh v. State of Uttar Pradesh, AIR 1973 SC 947, the death penalty was questioned as a breach of Articles 14, 19 and 21 for lack of process and it was held that the death sentence was performed in accordance with the procedure laid down by law. The Court of First Instance, upholding the constitutional validity of the death penalty, held that deprivation of life is legally permissible for being accepted as a lawful penalty by the draftsmen of our Constitution. It was also noted that the judge makes the option between a death punishment or a life sentence on the basis of the circumstances and the evidence and the essence of the offence reported during the trial.
Further in Rajendra Prasad v. State of Uttar Pradesh 1979 3 SCC 646. In the case at hand, the Apex Court held that the special reasons required would apply to a criminal rather than a crime and that the death penalty is the last move in which the murderer is unlikely to be healed and will tend to kill others if left alive. In addition, the Court claimed that it could only be granted if the protection of the state and society, public order and the interests of the general public were to prevail.
In the landmark judgement of Bachan Singh v. State of Punjab AIR 1980 SC 898. in 1980, the Supreme Court wanted to make up a doctrine expressly for crimes punishable by death in organizing to eliminate the complexity of the courts as to when to give the highest penalty of the country. The doctrine was developed in 1980 in the case of Bachan Singh by the Constitution Bench of five Judges while determining the constitutional provisions of the death sentence provided for in Section 302 IPC and the sentencing process provided for in Section 354(3) of the CrPC of 1973, the followed points are discussed.
- Only in the most serious cases of extreme guilt, will this severe death penalty be imposed?
- The conditions of the defendant and the conditions of the offence must be taken into account.
- Where a life sentence seems to be insufficient in view of the circumstances and nature of the crime, only a death sentence can be imposed; and
The mitigating and aggravating conditions must be balanced.
The Ratio Decidendi of Bacchan Singh’s case is that the death penalty is essential in the event that it is recognised as an alternative for the crime of murder and if the ordinary punishment suggested by the law for murder is indefinitely detained. This means that capital punishment must be imposed in the rarest of rare situations where an elective option is avoided.
Should the Principle of Rarest of Rare be Abolished?
Because there is no constitutional definition of what Rarest of Rare means, the issue occurs every time the Court awards the death penalty. There are situations in which the accused has committed rape as well as murder and has been given a death sentence; however, there are other situations with similar details and circumstances, but the accused has not been sentenced to death. It’s hard to work out what is related to the variations in punishments in such situations. Is it a ‘criminal’ or ‘Crime’ or ‘The Judge’? “Bachan Singh took into account all the circumstances relating to both of them.
Criminal and criminal, whereas Machhi Singh v. the State of Punjab AIR 1983 SC 957 responsive, “It’s just about the crime, not the offender. What makes the judge determine whether or not to. The case falls among the “rarest of rare cases” Is the Age of the Cold Survivor. A Deciding factor whether or not to allow such a categorization of sentences? And in one aspect,
The High Court of Bombay case verified a double life and double death sentences for rape and murder of a 2-year girl; whereas in Mohd. Chaman v. State (NCT of Delhi), “the Supreme Court allocated a death sentence for rape and murder of a 1-year-old and 6-month-old girl to life imprisonment. There are many varieties.
The conclusions of this principle as to whether the common conscience of society is at risk astonished; that varies from judge to judge. When time went by, the ideology that was imaginary to be initiated on a principle.
The doctrine has now become a “judgement-centric doctrine.”If the judicial officer really needs to keep this doctrine in place when it is appropriate to determine the particular elements and conditions.
On the basis of which the doctrine will rest absolutely. It’s highly important for the legislature to step in and clear the cloud around this doctrine because of the judiciary it provides a lot of subjective meaning and, in the course of that, it is developing. It is itself an “ultra-legislative.”
Conclusion
At the end of the day, it can be generally proclaiming that the Rarest Case Doctrine holds a very prominent position in the case of murder in India as well as in many other advanced parts of the world, such as the United States of America ( USA), the United Kingdom, South Africa, etc. The judge grants the death penalty to the perpetrator in any crime, which is the most important thing and most sensitive moment for both the Court and the convict, because one human life is taken before the trial, both judicially and legally. It is now perfectly clear that the death penalty is lawful if it is granted in keeping with the process laid down by law and does not infringe any constitutional right of the person. This doctrine is invoked in highly rare cases, where such a crime is relatively new and unimaginable to the judicial authorities and has caused a significant offence to the complainant which, to the greatest extent possible, is irreversible or can not be re-established. Thus, after scrutinizing the whole, it can be said that the principle of Rarest of Rare is partly a myth and partly a fact.
References:
0 Comments