BREAKING| Supreme Court Dismisses Plea To Abolish Hanging As Method To Execute Death Penalty, Says Union Free To Explore Alternatives
Amisha Shrivastava
18 Aug 2026 10:42 AM IST
The Supreme Court on Tuesday dismissed a petition seeking the abolition of death by hanging as a method to execute the death penalty.
At the same time, the Court clarified that the dismissal of the writ petition will not preclude future constitutional scrutiny if compelling medical or scientific evidence emerges demonstrating a need to revisit the issue. The Court clarified that the judgment will also not preclude the Union Government from undertaking a comprehensive review of the method of execution through an expert body to examine if an alternative method will better serve the Constitutional objective of minimising pain and suffering while ensuring dignity.
A bench of Justice Vikram Nath and Justice Sandeep Mehta pronounced the verdict in the petition which sought to declare unconstitutional Section 354(5) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, as per which the death sentence is to direct that the prisoner "be hanged by the neck till he is dead."
The PIL, filed by Senior Advocate Rishi Malhotra, sought to abolish the present practice of executing a death row convict by hanging which involves “prolonged pain and suffering”. It prayed that the mode of execution be replaced with intravenous lethal injection, shooting, electrocution or gas chamber in which a convict could die in just a matter of minutes.
Background
The petition was filed seeking the following reliefs:
1. Declare provisions contained under Section 354(5) CrPC as ultra vires of the Constitution for being discriminatory and violative of Article 21 of the Constitution and also in contravention of the Constitution Bench judgment in Gian Kaur's case;
2. Declare right to die by a dignified procedure of death as a fundamental right (defined under Article 21 of the Constitution of India).
The petition states that while in hanging, the entire execution process takes more than 40 minutes to declare the prisoner to be dead, the shooting process involves not more than a few minutes. In case of intravenous lethal injection, it's all over in 5 minutes.
The petitioner argues that execution as contemplated under Section 354(5) CrPC (hung by the neck till the person is dead) is not only barbaric, inhuman and cruel, but also against resolutions adopted by the United Nations Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC) that had categorically resolved that "where Capital punishment occurs, it shall be carried out so as to inflict minimum possible suffering".
In May, 2023, the AG informed the Court that he had recommended the formation of an expert committee to decide upon whether there existed better alternatives to execute the death penalty. He added that the government had been mulling over the members for the said expert committee.
Last year, the petitioner advocated for the adoption of use of lethal injection in place of hanging, by informing that 49 out of 50 states in USA have adopted the same. "Atleast give an option to the condemned prisoner whether he wants hanging or lethal injection...lethal injection is quick, humane and decent, as opposed to hanging, which is cruel, barbaric and lingering...for 40 minutes, the body lingers on the rope", he submitted. It was highlighted that in the armed forces, an option is given.
The Court on its part lamented the Union's opposition to a suggestion that death row convicts be given an option to choose lethal injection as mode of execution.
In January, the Court reserved orders in the PIL. The petitioner relied on a Law Commission of India report to support the prayers, which provides a comparative chart on what can be a better mode of execution.
Project 39A gave submissions on the alternative of lethal injection, particularly, as to what has been the experience in other jurisdictions like the United States (where it has been used the most) and submitted that it has been found that it's not really successful.
It submitted that an Expert Committee can explore alternatives and gather more evidence, while acknowledging that there is a certain degree of pain and suffering associated with hanging, as the condemned prisoner does not immediately pass away.
Adding to it, Justice Mehta pointed to the psychological impact of hanging on the hangmen themselves. AG Venkataramani told the Court that the matter is being examined by the Union at the highest level and some Committees have been constituted.
Case Title: Rishi Malhotra v. Union of India, W.P.(Crl.) No. 145/2017
