Death Penalty Debate: Supreme Court Slams Centre says, 'Government Not Ready To Evolve'
Appearing for the Union, Senior Advocate Sonia Mathur reiterated that the issue involved a policy decision, and cited the government’s affidavit to that effect.
While hearing a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) seeking alternative methods to replace death by hanging, the Supreme Court lamented the Union government’s opposition to a suggestion that death row convicts be given the option of choosing lethal injection as an alternative mode of execution. The bench remarked that the Centre appeared unwilling to evolve with the changes that have taken place over time.
A bench of Justices Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta made the oral observation after noting that, as per the Union’s counter affidavit, offering such a choice to convicts may not be “feasible.” The court’s comment came in response to arguments that execution by hanging inflicts prolonged pain and suffering, unlike lethal injection, which is considered quicker and more humane.
Court Observes Centre ‘Not Ready to Evolve’
During the hearing, Advocate Rishi Malhotra, who filed the PIL, urged the court to direct the government to adopt lethal injection as a more humane alternative to hanging. He further suggested that at the very least, convicts be allowed to choose between the two methods. Malhotra pointed out that 49 of 50 US states have already switched to lethal injection, calling it “quick, decent, and humane,” whereas hanging is “cruel, barbaric, and lingering, with the body often left on the rope for 40 minutes.”
At this, Justice Mehta remarked that the Union was not ready to evolve, even as societies and justice systems across the world have modernised their approach to capital punishment.
‘Policy Issue,’ Says Union
Appearing for the Union, Senior Advocate Sonia Mathur reiterated that the issue involved a policy decision, and cited the government’s affidavit to that effect. The bench then adjourned the matter to November 11.
The PIL, which calls for abolishing hanging as an execution method, instead recommends alternatives such as lethal injection, electrocution, shooting, or gas chamber, arguing these would ensure a quicker and less painful death.
Earlier, in March 2023, the court had asked Attorney General R. Venkataramani to collect data on the impact and duration of hanging and the feasibility of alternative methods. By May, the AG informed the court that he had recommended forming an expert committee to examine whether more humane methods could be adopted.
The court’s latest observation underscores a broader judicial concern, whether India’s methods of execution align with contemporary human rights standards and dignity in death.
Top Headlines
