Now Reading: Supreme Court rejects plea to end hanging, leaves door open for review
-
01
Supreme Court rejects plea to end hanging, leaves door open for review
The Supreme Court on Tuesday dismissed a petition seeking to replace hanging with less painful methods of execution, such as lethal injection. The bench of Justices Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta ruled…
The Supreme Court on Tuesday dismissed a petition seeking to replace hanging with less painful methods of execution, such as lethal injection. The bench of Justices Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta ruled that it cannot direct the legislature to adopt a particular mode of execution, but said its verdict would not prevent the Centre from conducting an expert review to minimise unnecessary pain while preserving the dignity of the condemned prisoner.
The petition, filed in 2017 by senior advocate Rishi Malhotra, challenged Section 354(5) of the CrPC and sought recognition of a right to a dignified death under Article 21. The petitioner argued that hanging can take up to 40 minutes to cause death, compared to about five minutes for shooting or lethal injection, and cited a UN resolution calling for the least possible suffering. The government had previously told the court that providing a choice of method was 'not practically feasible'.
The Attorney General had earlier informed the court that a committee had been constituted to examine the issue. The Centre had argued that hanging is 'quick, simple' and that other methods like lethal injection are not necessarily less painful. The ruling leaves the current system intact, but keeps open the possibility of future change based on scientific evidence.
Indian Opinion Analysis
The coverage from gulfnews.com and thefederal.com is largely uniform straight wire reporting with no discernible editorial slant. Both outlets focus on the Supreme Court's dismissal of the petition and its permission for the government to conduct an expert review. Neither source emphasizes the court's earlier oral dissatisfaction with the government's position, nor does either highlight the petitioner's arguments beyond the basic facts. The measured takeaway is that the court has deferred the policy decision to the executive while leaving room for future scientific scrutiny. The key date to watch is the government's next move on the expert committee.
Coverage: 2 sources, 2 neutral
Sources (2): gulfnews.com (neutral report), thefederal.com (neutral report)
This story was synthesised by AI from the 2 sources linked above.
Updated: this story now draws on 2 sources.
