Bachan Singh v. State of Punjab - Rarest of Rare

 

Introduction

It is one of the landmark judgment in the legal history of India. The judgment is famous for introducing the doctrine of “Rarest of the Rare”. This was an AIR 1980 judgment of the supreme court which was decided in 1983 by the five-judges bench. The name of the five judges are given below:

• Justice Y.C. Chandrachud

• Justice A. Gupta

• Justice N. Untwalia

• Justice P.N  Bhagwati

• Justice R. Sarkaria

Bachan Singh was the accused of crime for murder of two individuals and held liable for death sentence. Due to take care of Article 21 of the Indian Constitution, which talks about the protection of right to life and personal liberty. The question raised that concerns regarding the validity of the death sentence in India.

This case has a own importance in our legal history because it established the legal structure of death penalty in India. The case pioneer the concept of “rarest of rare” which has been used as a guidance while deciding the judgements. Whether the death penalty should be imposed in cases murder under section 300 of Indian penal code. 

The issue is related to the death penalty was arise before the supreme court and SC announced significant limitations. Then introduced the doctrine “rarest of the rare”. Which means state can give the death penalty in rare conditions only. Where, the action of crime is very heinous.

Historical Background

Before Bachan Singh, the approach to the death penalty in India lacked a standardized framework. The judiciary faced the difficult task of determining when to award the ultimate punishment and when opted for a milder sentence. The ambiguity surrounding this issue led to inconsistent application and raised concerns about the arbitrary nature of capital punishment.

Read also - Municipal Corporation of Delhi v. Subhagwanti

Facts of the Case:

1). Bachan Singh, he was found guilty for murdering her wife and sentenced to life in prison. After served his prison sentence, he lived with his cousin Hukam Singh and his family. 

2). Following that, Bachan Singh was convicted and sentenced to death for the murders of Desa, Durga, and Veeran. 

3). The sessions Judge in the case, made accused liable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.

4). The Punjab High Court upheld the sessions court’s judgment and denied his appeal. Bachan Singh then file SLP before the Supreme Court, which granted him Special Leave.

5). Then, appeal raised a question, whether Bachan Singh’s case are capable to prove “special reasons” for imposing the death penalty? 

Bachan Singh, a resident of Punjab, was convicted of murder and sentenced to death by the Sessions Court. The case reached the Supreme Court, where the constitutional validity of the death penalty was challenged on the grounds that it violated the right to life guaranteed by Article 21 of the Indian Constitution.

Issues Raised

1). Is Section 302 of IPC is Unconstitutional? Which talks about death sentence as a punishment for murder.

2). Is the sentencing process outlined in Section 354(3) of the CrPC, 1973 illegal? Where the courts are  unrestrained authority and permits the death penalty to be imposed arbitrarily on someone. Who found guilty of any crime punishable by death or life imprisonment?

Read also - Rudal Shah v. State of Bihar

The "Rarest of the Rare" Doctrine

In its landmark judgment, the Supreme Court, led by Chief Justice Y.V. Chandrachud, upheld the constitutionality of the death penalty but introduced the "rarest of the rare" doctrine. The court held that the death penalty should be imposed only in the rarest of rare cases, where the crime is of an exceptionally heinous and gruesome nature.

This doctrine aimed to bring consistency and rationality to the imposition of the death penalty, steering away from arbitrary sentencing. The court acknowledged that not all murderers deserved the death penalty, and it was essential to consider the circumstances of each case individually.

Guidelines for Imposing Death Penalty

The Bachan Singh judgment provided certain guidelines to be followed while determining whether a case fell within the "rarest of the rare" category. The court emphasized the need to consider both the crime and the criminal. Factors such as the motive behind the crime, the brutality of the act, and the impact on society were to be taken into account.

Furthermore, the court highlighted the importance of examining the possibility of reform and rehabilitation of the offender. The presence of mitigating factors, such as the age and mental state of the accused, could influence the sentencing decision. The judiciary was now tasked with conducting a thorough examination of each case to ensure a fair and just application of the death penalty.

Impact on Capital Punishment in India

The Bachan Singh case brought a significant shift in the Indian legal landscape concerning the death penalty. The "rarest of the rare" doctrine provided a principled approach to the imposition of capital punishment, aiming to reduce arbitrariness and curb the excessive use of the death penalty.

Since Bachan Singh, Indian courts have consistently referred to the "rarest of the rare" doctrine in deciding death penalty cases. The judiciary's emphasis on individualized sentencing, considering both the crime and the criminal, has led to a more nuanced and balanced approach.

Read also - Doctrine of Res Ipsa Loquitur

Controversies and Criticisms

Despite its attempts to bring clarity, the "rarest of the rare" doctrine has not been without its controversies and criticisms. The subjectivity involved in determining what constitutes the rarest of the rare has led to inconsistent application. Critics argue that the doctrine is inherently vague and gives judges wide discretion, potentially resulting in arbitrary decisions.

Moreover, concerns have been raised about the socio-economic bias in the application of the death penalty. There is a fear that individuals from marginalized sections of society may be disproportionately affected, raising questions about the fairness of the entire system.

Conclusion

Bachan Singh v. State of Punjab marked a turning point in India's approach towards death penalty. The introduction of the "rarest of the rare" doctrine aimed to maintain a balance between the rights of the accused and the societal need for justice. Whereas the case provided a framework for an application of capital punishment in needed conditions only. challenges persist in achieving uniformity and addressing concerns of arbitrariness.

The legacy of Bachan Singh endures in the ongoing discourse on the death penalty in India. As the legal landscape evolves and societal attitudes shift, the judiciary continues to grapple with the complexities of the "rarest of the rare" doctrine, striving to ensure justice while upholding the fundamental principles of fairness and equality.