Justice system may be affected if death sentence is not executed on time: Supreme Court
Supreme Court: The bench has expressed
dissatisfaction and concern over the death penalty not being executed for years
even after the Supreme Court has decided to execute it. In the Supreme Court, a
bench of Justice Abhay S Oak, Justice Ahmaduddin Amanullah and Justice Augustine
George Masih reserved its decision after completing the hearing on one such
case.
The bench expressed concern that indefinite delay in
awarding death penalty under the guise of legal process may have a bad effect
on the death penalty convict and the entire justice system. This is often
happening due to the lack of guidelines for timely disposal of mercy petitions.
The court said an important
thing.
During the hearing, the three-judge bench said that
such a delay is often considered to be like a sword hanging over someone's
head. Because until your death sentence is not executed, this sword will remain
hanging over your head. There is a fear in the mind that this hanging sword can
fall on your head at any time.
While hearing the case of Maharashtra Government vs
Pradeep Yashwant Kokade, the bench said that often such delays also occur due
to lack of clarity on what procedure should be adopted by the Sessions Court in
cases where the death penalty has been confirmed by the High Court but the
convict has filed a mercy petition.
The court asked that suppose the Sessions Court issues
a warrant for execution of the death penalty immediately after receiving the
writ from the Supreme Court because every petition of the convict is rejected,
then by then the mercy petition is filed with the Governor or the President.
That is, they issue the warrant despite the mercy petition being pending. What
is the procedure for the Sessions Court when the mercy petition is pending?
This needs to be clarified.
The court was hearing the
case of Maharashtra.
To bridge this gap, the Supreme Court has suggested
framing of guidelines to give full effect to Sections 413 and 414 of the Code
of Criminal Procedure/CrPC (and corresponding provisions under Sections 453 and
454 of the Indian Civil Defence Code/BNSS). This will relate to the execution
of death penalty orders by the Sessions Court.
This bench of the Supreme Court was hearing a criminal
appeal filed by the Maharashtra government in 2019. and The state had
challenged the Bombay High Court's decision to commute the death sentence
awarded to two men, Purushottam Borate and Pradeep Kokade, convicted for the
rape and or murder of a Pune BPO employee in 2007.
The High Court commuted the sentence on the view that
there was a considerable delay in the execution of the death sentence. This
delay also includes about 1-2 years taken to decide on the mercy petitions sent
by the convicts to the Governor. After this, the High Court converted the death
sentence given to two convicts into life imprisonment. In this, each will have
to spend at least 35 years in jail.
On this appeal, the Supreme Court asked the state why
it is insisting that the convicts be hanged despite a long delay? During the
hearing, it was argued that the delay in the execution of the death penalty in
this case was not only due to administrative reasons but also due to judicial
and procedural reasons. Because it was told that even after the mercy petition
was rejected by the Governor, the convicts sentenced to death remained
uncertain for years about when they would be given the death penalty.
Emphasis laid on setting the
process.
The lawyer of the convicts argued that this delay is
unconstitutional and violates their rights under Article 21 (life and personal
liberty) of the Constitution. The court found that the execution of the death
penalty may be further delayed due to the Sessions Court not being actively
informed about the rejection of the mercy petition. The bench said that all
these delays are a violation of the rights of not only the convict but also the
victims. This case has exposed the flaws in the system and process.
This forced the court to consider whether there should
not be indefinite delay in the execution of the death penalty. Some guidelines
should be made to ensure this. As Justice Oka said, 'Probably now we will have
to decide the procedure. It will be about when, how and what the public
prosecutor will have to do when the mercy petition of the convict against the
death sentence is rejected. It cannot happen like this. There should be a
process for how the prosecutor and the court have to react.'
The bench said that after the Governor rejects the mercy petition, the state should move forward proactively in contacting the Sessions Court for the execution of the death penalty.
