SC questions Centre’s status-quoist attitude on mode of executing death row convicts

As the Centre opposed a petition seeking removal of the present mode of execution of death row convicts by hanging from the statute, the Supreme Court on Wednesday questioned its status-quoist attitude on the contentious issue.

"Problem is, the government is not ready to evolve...it's a very old procedure, things have changed over a period of time,” a Bench of Justice Vikram Nath and Justice Sandeep Mehta said.

The Bench was hearing senior advocate Rishi Malhotra’s 2017 petition seeking abolition of the practice of executing death row convicts by hanging and replacing it with less painful methods such as "intravenous lethal injection, shooting, electrocution or gas chamber".

The PIL referred to the 187th Report of the Law Commission advocating removal of the present mode of execution from the statute.

"I will demonstrate that the best way is lethal injection because 49 out of 50 states in the US have adopted lethal injection," Malhotra told the Bench.

He said execution by administering lethal injection was quick, humane and decent as compared to hanging which was cruel and barbaric as the body lies lingering on the rope for around 40 minutes.

Justice Mehta asked the Centre’s counsel to advise the government on the petitioner’s proposition regarding providing an option to the death row convict.

"This is also addressed in the counter (affidavit) that this may not be very feasible to give an option", she said, adding it was a policy decision and the government can take a call on that. She referred to the top court's May 2023 order in which the top court had noted Attorney General R Venkataramani's submission that the government was mulling appointing an expert committee to review the issues raised in the PIL.

As the Centre's counsel said she would seek instructions on setting up the expert committee, the Bench posted the matter for hearing on November 11.

In an affidavit filed in April 2018, the Centre had defended “hanging by the neck till death” -- the practice of execution of death sentence, terming it a safer and quick method for termination of life of a death row convict. Other modes of execution of death sentences such as lethal injection or firing squad, if bungled, could lead to results that could be called barbaric, inhuman, and cruel, it had said.

Malhotra has contended that hanging involved prolonged pain and suffering compared to the other two methods. He wanted the top court to “declare Right to Die by a dignified procedure of death” as a fundamental right under Article 21 of the Constitution.

However, the Centre had said, “The procedure followed for execution by electrocution or lethal injection or firing squad could be just as inhumane or barbaric to another person. As far as likelihood of execution getting botched up is concerned, the statistics show that hanging with more advanced procedures is far safer than techniques such as lethal injection.”

It had said hanging was consistent with the State’s obligation to ensure the process of execution was conducted with decency and decorum without involving degradation or brutality of any kind.