Winners' Dashboard
Demo Classes
+91 99714 44054
info@manulawclasses.com
Facts of the Case:
Bachan Singh murdered his wife and was initially sentenced to life in prison. After his release, he lived with his cousin’s family but was later charged, convicted, and sentenced to death for the murders of three individuals (Desa, Durga, and Veeran). The Punjab High Court upheld the death sentence, and Bachan Singh appealed to the Supreme Court.
Issues Raised:
- Constitutionality of Death Penalty (Section 302 of IPC): Whether the death penalty prescribed for murder under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code is unconstitutional.
- Constitutionality of Sentencing Procedure (Section 354(3) of CrPC): If the death penalty is deemed constitutional, whether the sentencing procedure outlined in Section 354(3) of the Criminal Procedure Code is unconstitutional due to its perceived unfettered power given to courts.
- Existence of “Special Reasons” for Death Penalty: Whether the facts of Bachan Singh’s case qualify as “special reasons” under Section 354(3) of the CrPC, warranting the imposition of the death penalty.
Decision –
The Supreme Court held that both Section 302 of the IPC (death penalty provision) and Section 354(3) of the CrPC (sentencing procedure) are constitutionally valid.
It established the “rarest of the rare” doctrine, emphasizing that the death penalty should be reserved for the most exceptional cases.
The decision laid down several principles:
- The death penalty should be avoided except in cases of extreme culpability.
- Judges should consider both the circumstances of the crime and the offender before deciding on the death penalty.
- Life imprisonment is the norm, and the death penalty is the exception, to be imposed only when life imprisonment appears insufficient.
- A balance sheet of aggravating and mitigating circumstances must be created before deciding on the death penalty, with mitigating circumstances given due weight.
Justice Bhagwati dissented, arguing that the death penalty provision in Section 302 of the IPC violates constitutional rights (Articles 14 and 21) due to the lack of legislative guidance on when the death penalty should be imposed.
In summary, the Bachan Singh case established the “rarest of the rare” doctrine, limiting the imposition of the death penalty to exceptional cases, and upheld the constitutionality of the death penalty provision while providing guidelines for its application.
