Supreme Court Death Penalty Digest 2022

In 2021, the Supreme Court had not affirmed death penalty in a single case. However, in 2022, it did confirm death sentence in two cases. Nonetheless, 2022 was a significant year for death penalty jurisprudence in India. In March, 2022, the Apex Court had suo moto decided to consider laying down norms and guidelines pertaining to the process of collection and scrutinising mitigation information in death penalty matters. The Court was deciding an application filed through Project39A, National Law University, Delhi seeking permission for a mitigation investigator to interview the accused in prison for the purpose of collection of information pertaining to his congenital, mental and neurological conditions. The application and notes submitted by Project 39A indicated the need for an elaborate investigation to collect mitigation information to ensure that the obligation of the Court to hear the accused on the issue of sentencing is not reduced to a mere formality. It was emphasised that it is crucial that the social history of an accused be collected only by one trained in social-work, criminology, physiology, sociology. The involvement of the mitigation investigator is a necessity as it facilitates effective representation of the accused. A 3-Judge Bench of the Supreme Court mulled over the issue in the suo moto petition - whether same day sentencing is permissible, and decided to refer it to a Constitution Bench. It noted that, while a catena of judgments stressed on the importance of a separate hearing on the issue of mandatory imposition of death sentence, another set of judgments of Benches of equal strength had not found same-day sentencing falling foul of Section 235(2) of the CrPC.This year (on 29.07.2022), in an order passed by a Division Bench of the Supreme Court, it took exception to a judge sentencing an accused to death in a POCSO case, in a trial, which was concluded within a span of 4 days, and sentencing another POCSO accused to life imprisonment after a one day trial. While issuing notice in the plea filed by a suspended Additional Session Judge, Bihar challenging the disciplinary proceedings for decking the POCSO cases in such a manner, a baffled court reckoned -"We have been trying to devise methods to assess mitigating factors on death sentence and they have to see the prison records. Here, this judge has passed the death sentence in 4 days."Disapproves incentives granted to Prosecutors for 'securing' death penaltyThe significance of this year also lies in the fact that the Apex Court, in 2022, was faced with the reality that there are State Governments granting incentives to prosecutors to secure the death penalty. The Court was apprised that the State of Madhya Pradesh has an existing policy wherein the public prosecutors are given incentives and increments based on the volume of cases prosecuted by them in which death sentence is awarded. Certain activities are assigned weightage points and at the end of the month the prosecutor with the maximum point is conferred the title of 'Star performer'. Capital punishment and life sentence for certain offences have been assigned a higher weightage of 1000 points. Moreover, one of the criteria to be adjudged as the 'Pride of Prosecution' is exemplary work in securing capital punishment. The Court was astonished that if such a policy incentivising outcomes of trial are adopted by States, the Public Prosecutors, who have the potential to virtually drive prosecution, would chose to suppress material to achieve the pre-decided outcome, thus adversely influencing the trial against the interests of the accused in blatant violation of principles of fair trial. The Supreme Court orally directed the Counsel appearing on behalf of the State to advise the Government to withdraw all such policies for public prosecutors as well as similar policies for the Investigating officials. The year witnessed the Apex Court highlighting the importance of psychological evaluation of convicts who have been awarded death sentences, and staying death penalty executions directing psychological evaluation of the accused persons. These orders to stay execution have been passed, mostly, in interlocutory applications moved through Project 39A seeking permission that a mitigating investigator be allowed to interview the accused persons and submit a report regarding mitigating circumstances.DEATH PENALTY CONFIRMEDManoj Pratap Singh v. State of Rajasthan SLP (Crl) No. 7899-7900 of 2015Prosecution's case: Manoj(accused) visited the complainant's vegetable cart one day and gave chocolates to her 8 year old daughter(deceased), a person with disability. He returned to the cart within 10 minutes and took away the deceased on his motorcycle. An FIR was registered. Eventually, Manoj was found at a bus station from where he was arrested. He conceded that he had killed the child and as per his statement the body of the deceased was recovered. The post-mortem report indicated that the...

Supreme Court Death Penalty Digest 2022

Sohini Chowdhury

Tags