Here is your speech on Capital Punishment in India:
The Indian Penal Code provides death sentence for certain specified offences. These offences are: (1) Waging war against the Government. (2) Abatement of mutiny (3) Murder (4) Dacoity with Murder.
ADVERTISEMENTS:
Abatement of suicide by child or in some person, etc. out of 511 sections, only few sections impose capital punishment. The capital punishment is not imposed for every small or big offence. Only for grave, unpardonable, heinous crimes it is imposed. So such situations are rarest of the rare, and it is the highest punishment known to the man. It determines the life and extinction of a person. Capital punishment is one of the travesties of the administration of criminal justice in modern times.
The capital punishment has been in force from the time immemorial, from the ancient times to modern times. The ancient law of crimes in India provided death sentence for quite a good number of offences.
Image Source: 185.26.182.219
The great Indian epics, viz., the Mahabharata and the Ramayana also contain references about the offender being punished with vadha dand (death penalty).
The great ancient law giver ‘Manu’ also contended that in order to refrain people from doing sinful murders, death penalty was necessary. During the medieval period of Moghuls also there were references of death penalty shows. Many different modes of amputating the criminals to death are known to have existed at that time and in them during the period of Moghuls, the sentence of death revived in its crudest form.
ADVERTISEMENTS:
Then during British regime in India also there is presence of death sentence shows by many references. Only the different barbaric modes of putting offender to death were abolished under British system of criminal justice administration and death by hanging remained the only legalized mode of inflicting death sentence, which is practiced still now in India.
Death sentence, in case of heinous crimes, serves as an effective deterrent to remind the potential criminals about the severity of law towards heinous crimes. The fear of being condemned to death is perhaps the greatest deterrent which keeps an offender away from criminality.
Generally, the principle of punishment is grown up from a legal demand of the society. Capital punishment is also of such demands. If a cruel and brutal minded criminal is not punished, and he is left free to move in the society, it destroys the very structure of the society.
Nobody will respect the law and order and so as a result of this rules become weaker and the peace in the society disappears. Thus, the prosperity of society will be stopped. Therefore, the law demands to punish the law breakers and so capital punishment was evolved due to legal demand, and still it is continued and it becomes necessity to eliminate the most violent law-breakers.
ADVERTISEMENTS:
But, today, of all the forms of punishment, capital punishment is perhaps the most debated subject among the modern penologists with the expansion of the scope of human right jurisprudence in India. Several criminologists, penologists, sociologists, politicians and jurists also strongly urge for the abolition of capital punishment.
The current wave of reformation in the field of criminal justice system, started reformative thinking, and began to argue against the capital punishment. Such persons have reacted to capital punishment differently, and today it is the most debatable question. Because the majority of jurists, penologists, criminologists, social workers, etc. strongly condemns reformists of capital punishment and argues that it is not possible to abolish the capital punishment.
Such retentionists support capital punishment on the ground that: (1) It has a great deterrent value and commands evidence for law in general public.
(2) Those who support capital punishment feel that death of killer is a requirement of justice and they believe that death of victim must be balanced by the death of the guilty party, otherwise the victim will not be avenged and the crime in society will be increased so capital punishment is a social need.
Because, when a person has become dangerous to the society, and is not in’ a position to be reformed and no excuse can be given to his heinous Act, it becomes social need to eliminate such criminal from society. Otherwise he spoils the society and to save the social hygiene it is necessary to eliminate such dangerous person from society for preservation of health of the society.
(3) There are habitual offenders, recidivists who are crime- repeaters and they are basically anti-social, aggressive or highly competitive, indifferent and such offenders are always dangerous to society. Because there is very poor capacity for social adjustment in them. They commit crime with boldness and courage and they are beyond reformative attitude.
Such persons are habitually addicted to crime. These are the persons who have embraced criminality as a mode of life and so, capital punishment is the only alternative to eliminate such person from society.
(4) If such habitual offenders or persons committing heinous crimes are put in jail under imprisonment of life, state has to incur huge expenses on him for his food accommodation, medicines, and watching. They are also performed their criminal activities in jail and exploits remaining prisoner and become troublesome to the prison staff. And so put such criminal to capital punishment instead of keeping him prisonment for life save money of state and also trouble of prison staff.
(5) The capital punishment is imposed only in rarest of rare cases. In the rarest of rare case, the session judge imposes death sentence, if prosecution proves the offences successfully and the witnesses give their evidence perfectly. After that High Court has to confirm such death sentence.
After confirmation the convict can appeal to High Court and then to Supreme Court even after such appeal dismissed there are chances to the convicted to petition to the Governor and to President. This happens only in rarest cases and the possibility of injustice is very very low, and in India, the number of capital punishments is very meagre and can be calculated on hand fingers per year.
(6) It is true that social conditions in India are almost different from other countries. Quite large number of murders and homicide which occur in our country are due to variance of racial, ethical and religion political cultures and to satisfy own ego, sometimes pre-planned crimes are committed and such criminals are well aware of gravity and consequences of there criminal acts despite of it they easily perform crimes. So if the provision of capital punishment is existing in society then only there is some deterrent effect on society like ours.
Capital punishment is definite. The criminal cannot escape in future and cannot trouble the society. If such dangerous criminals are kept in prison for life, there are chances of escaping or causing cruel and illegal acts even after their release after a long imprisonment, so the capital punishment avoids all such incidences.
Supporters of capital punishment say that the painful methods of execution of capital punishment had already been abolished in the majority of nations. Now most of the states execute the capital punishment on criminals with light pains and sufferings, viz., hanging, shooting, so it is not a barbaric act nowadays and not doesn’t violate humanitarian attitude.
Some penologists, criminologists, jurists, social workers, reformists say that crime is a disease, and the germs of such disease are within the society, and first those germs should be eradicated and society gives birth to crime and criminal and for faults of society, the law should not blame the criminals, they stress on prevention and reformation principles according to them every criminal should be transformed into a law-abiding citizen.
According to them: (1) Capital punishment is the most cruel, inhuman and an example of barbarism, and it is ridiculous to say that by killing a criminal with less pains and sufferings is humanitarian thing.
(2) Reformists argued that by imposing capital punishment, neither the public nor criminals fear to commit the crimes. Moreover, it is true that more the deterrence increase so the crime rate. For example, after committing the crime because of fear of prosecution and then of death sentence recidivist also destroy each and every evidence and every person who are witnesses of their criminal act and so there is a danger to society.
(3) They said that Gandhiji was the foremost proposer to abolish capital punishment and preached us ‘Ahinsa’. Gandhiji pleaded that “Hate sin, but not the sinner” and according to them every criminal should be transformed with the efforts of society.
Reformists argued that the famous writer of epic ‘Ramayana’ Valmiki was a notorious criminal in his past and became a great Person by the preaching of God Narada, such examples in our India show that any criminal can turn into good citizen by reformative means and so if such criminals or weak minded persons should be treated psychologically under the supervision of the efficient professionals, doctors, etc. and with good education, training in any technical profession there is possibility of improvement in them.
Instead to giving them capital punishment it is duty of the society to help them in such situation because the germs of the crime-disease are within the society.
(4) They said that many a times it happens that the rich, political and influential people can easily escape from the hands of prosecution by using their influence, power and money, in the corrupt administrative, social atmosphere in India. Rich and higher class people have no fear of punishment and after committing heinous crimes they easily escape because they know the loopholes of the law, courts, and police and can escape by spending money.
There are several incidents in the world legal history that innocents were put to capital punishment. There may be judicial errors in imposing capital punishment. There are chances, where grave injustice may be caused to innocent and poor persons alleged as criminals by the criminal justice system. And once the person is removed from the world permanently by capital punishment, there are no chances to getting him back.
(5) It is an admitted principle that the courts impose capital punishments to a few criminals in rarest of rare cases. However, it is also true that there were infinite criminals in society such as Mafia groups, killers, rapists, smugglers, sadists, etc. in the society, who are not detected nor caught by the police for several reasons.
Those criminals are still doing their illegal activities. The harm to the society as already been done by such criminals is not easy to eliminate so how can it is proper to say that capital punishment can abolish crime from society.
(6) It is ridiculous opinion that capital punishment can save the public money, which are spent on convict for imprisonment for life and so put the convict to capital punishment. Rather the convict for imprisonment for life does hard labour in prison and earns sweat-money for the state. In such a way such reformists place tremendous humanitarian grounds to support their contention of abolition of capital punishment.
From above all discussion and after examining both the sides in favour or in counter argument in favour of the abolition of capital punishment we have concluded here that it is a hot controversy (discussion) in the entire India or even in the whole world. This discussion remained in bloom when two criminals, Chalapathi Rao and Vijayavardhana Rao were sentenced to death sentence for burning 32 passengers in Chilakalooripeta bus plundering case and death sentence was confirmed by the High Court.
On appeal the Supreme Court also confirmed the death sentence. The Governor and the President also rejected their mercy petition. Several social organizations began to agitate for the abolition of the capital punishment; some of them applied S.C. to exempt these two criminals, as they belonged to scheduled caste youth.
The supporters of capital punishment severely condemned their attitude and argued that exemption from death sentence on ground of caste or religion is not good for the health of society and there two criminals burned 32 innocent passengers and it is a rarest of rare offence. At the time of case there arise a great controversy all over the India.
There are certain persons, viz., sadists, sexual perverts, etc. who have no sensibility or shame to do illegal acts. Moreover, they feel proud in doing them. Such persons rape the children, women and kill the brutally. They enjoy only in harassing the physically weak persons, such persons have no moral values.
After committing immoral, unethical acts with a fear that victims will disclose their inhuman and brutal acts to public, they kill victims without mercy. Such sadist’s sexual perverts, have no right to live in the society.
Though it is also true that the capital punishment and undoubtedly against the notions of modern rehabilitative processes of treating of offenders. It does not offer opportunities to the offender to reform himself.
But reformation of criminal is good to hear, but is not practical, there is a high gap in between hope and practicality in the present century, though it is evident in our history, that notorious criminals change into great man, but in present structure of the India and its economy, it is highly impossible to reform every criminal and particularly the habitual offenders and recidivists by psychotherapy and social reforms.
Man is selfish and always have desire to more and more comforts and because of increasing greed, there are numberous smugglers, mafia, recidivists blood-suckers, sex manics persons in society who to achieve their illegal aims kill numerous innocent people, then how can we say that, it is the duty of society to absorb them, (because their criminal tendency gets birth in society) and society must accept them and help them for their reformation.
It is not possible in the present time and if the psychotherapy or reformative treatment can be afforded to all the mentally disturbed persons. Crores of rupees, and their major earnings are spent only on reformation process of criminals and which not possible in our countries were, there is scarcity of food, unemployment, illiteracy, orthodox and religious beliefs, etc. are spread all over the nation. And there is a urgent need to solve these problems instead of spending huge money on risky reformative operations of criminals.
In the ancient times the criminals were not regarded as human beings. They were treated as slaves. They were physically and mentally harassed for the smallest offences, there are variety of modes of execution of death penalty and those were implemented very violently and brutally.
But nowadays in India, only one form of capital punishment is implemented. That is hanging till death and is not as brutal as in past in response to the resolution moved in Parliament in 1962 on the abolition of capital punishment; the Government of India referred the question to the Law Commission. The commission in its report presented to the Lok Sabha on November 18, 1971 did not recommend any material change in the offences which are at present punishable with death under the IPC.
The Report suggested that:
(1) Children below 18 years of age should not be sentenced to death.
(2) It is not necessary to exempt women generally from the death penalty, etc., thus it is clear from above report that Law Corrimission strongly feels that capital punishment acts as an effective deterrent which is the most important object.
We can conclude from the report of Law Commission that, having regard to the peculiar conditions prevalent in India and the paramount need for maintaining law and order in this country, we cannot risk the experiment of abolition of capital punishment.
In India, pregnant women are never hanged until they deliver baby. Therefore, from all foregoing discussion it is finally concluded here—that though capital punishment is devoid of any practical utility, yet its retention in the penal laws seems expedient keeping in view the present circumstances when the incidence of crime is on a constant increase.
Time is not yet ripe when complete abolition of capital punishment can be strongly supported without endangering the social security. It is no exaggeration to say that in the present time the retention of capital punishment seems to be morally and legally justified. It serves as a reminder to everyone that in case of unpardonable crime one has to forfeit his own right of life and survival.
It must be noted that the essence of criminal justice system in India has always been to provide protection to society and also aims at securing better social order by insulating against the unwarranted acts emanating from the individual therefore.
It is essential to implement deterrent, measures against criminals who pose a danger to the society and so there is no other way in present generation instead of capital punishment for heinous crimes and so, until a suitable solution is discovered to prevent the crimes in the society, the capital punishment should be continued. It is the demand of changing scenario of this century.