NATIONAL LAW UNIVERSITY, DELHI

CENTER ON THE DEATH PENALTY

published by
Centre on the Death Penalty
National Law University, Delhi Press
Sector 14, Dwarka
New Delhi 110078
Published in January 2018

@National Law University, Delhi 2018

All rights reserved

analysis and writing

Peter John
Poornima Rajeshwar
Rahul Raman

research Assistants
Kali Srikari Kancherla
Pritam Raman Giriya
Varsha Sharma

design
Struckby.co
Set in Founders Grotesk and Pitch by Klim Type Foundry,
Druk and Portrait Text by Commercial Type Foundry.

Printed and bound in India, 2018

DEATH PENALTY
IN INDIA
ANNUAL
STATISTICS
REPORT

2016
2017
foreword

The second edition of The Death Penalty in India: Annual Statistics

brought out by the Centre on the Death Penalty (the Centre) at
National Law University, Delhi attempts to compile comprehensive
data on the use of the death penalty in India in 2017.
Since the first edition, we have improved upon our data collection
systems and broadened our search avenues to meticulously track all
cases involving the death penalty. Nonetheless, we continued to run
into some roadblocks because of the generally poor quality of data
maintenance by the state institutions responsible for administering
the death penalty. In addition, there were delays and resistances from
many of these state institutions in providing information.
We filed a total of 200 applications under the Right to Information
Act, 2005 (RTIs) covering all prison and home departments, High
Courts, and Governor’s Offices across India to collect information
on death row prisoners. We also regularly mined the High Court and
Supreme Court websites to track movements in cases. In addition, we
wrote to the State Legal Services Authority of every state to further
verify mined information. Since most Sessions Courts either don’t
have websites or do not update them, local newspaper reports proved
to be the most reliable source of information for tracking number of
death sentences in 2017.
We found several issues with the responses we received from the state
departments. Many responses were incomplete or incorrect. Each RTI
resulted in several transfers within the department before we could
receive a final response. These transfers caused significant delays in
our data collection process. Further, the High Court websites are not
updated regularly which made our search particularly difficult. In a
majority of cases, we had to track the lawyers involved in the case to
obtain information. These issues required us to monitor our database

1 DEATH PENALTY IN INDIA–ANNUAL STATISTICS REPORT 2017

1. The Death Penalty in India: Annual regularly and tie up information from diverse sources to present the
Statistics 2016, Centre on the Death
figures in this report.
Penalty, National Law University
Delhi,February 2017. The lack of coordination between the state institutions and their
2. The number of prisoners in Uttar inefficiency in maintaining basic information on those sentenced to
Pradesh increased by 7, Haryana and death calls for further scrutiny and essential policy reforms in criminal
Jharkhand by 2 each, and Karnataka and justice administration. Notwithstanding this state of affairs, we are
Kerala by 1 each. These figures were
confident that this report presents the most comprehensive dataset on
added after the relevant High Court
websites updated the statuses of these
the death penalty in India available in the public domain.
cases in 2017. It is pertinent to note that during the course of our consolidation
of information for 2017, the numbers that we released for 2016�
also underwent significant revision. The total number of prisoners
sentenced in 2016 now stand at 149 (previously recorded as 136)2 and
the total death row population at the end of 2016 increased to 399
(previously recorded as 397) . The data on nature of crime and state-
specific population have also been corrected in this report. Having
witnessed the complex nature of aggregating these numbers, we
hope that the accuracy and availability of data on the death penalty
will continuously improve in the years to come along with our data
collection efforts.
We would like to acknowledge the exceptional work of our interns
Kali Srikari Kancherla, Pritam Raman Giriya and Varsha Sharma
(undergraduate law students at National Law University Delhi), who
were instrumental in filing RTIs, mining court websites, tracking news
reports, and the overall maintenance of our database.

2
important
numbers
2017

The numbers below account for death sentences awarded by Sessions

Courts, and acquittals and commutations by appellate courts. Each
number in this Report represents a person and not a case, unless
otherwise specified. Statistics for the Supreme Court pertain to
criminal appeals and review petitions.

prisoners on death row as on 31st december 2017 : 371

3 DEATH PENALTY IN INDIA–ANNUAL STATISTICS REPORT 2017

 death penalty
Death Sentence Commutation

cases in 2017
Acquittals Confirmation

SESSIONS COURT

109
HIGH COURT

53 35 11
total 99

SUPREME COURT

07*
*Out of the 7 confirmations, 1 was a criminal appeal with 4 prisoners and 2 were review petitions with 3 prisoners.
Supreme Court did not commute or acquit any prisoners.

4
sessions
courts
in 2017

States where death penalty was imposed in 2016 but not in 2017

 Assam
 Delhi
 Gujarat
 Odisha
 Telangana
 Tripura

149
Total number of
109
Total number of
persons sentenced persons sentenced
to death in 2016 to death in 2017

5 DEATH PENALTY IN INDIA–ANNUAL STATISTICS REPORT 2017

 State-wise Distribution Persons sentenced to death in 2017

of persons sentenced to
death in 2017

01 Jammu & Kashmir

19
01 06
01 11

Uttar Pradesh
Uttrakhand 03

West Bengal
06

Chhattisgarh
Punjab

Bihar
Jharkhand
06 Haryana

08 Rajasthan

06 Madhya Pradesh

23 Maharashtra

01 Andhra Pradesh

02 Karnataka

13 Tamil Nadu

02 Kerala

6
nature
of crime

The data on the nature of crime of those sentenced to death in 2017

has been categorised into murder simpliciter (includes cases where the
prisoners were convicted only for murder), murder involving sexual
violence, terror offences, dacoity and murder, robbery and murder,
kidnapping and murder, rioting and murder, and drug offences.
An analysis of the nature of crimes for which prisoners were sentenced
to death reveals that death penalty imposed for murder simpliciter and
murder involving sexual violence constituted 74% of the total crimes
in 2016 and 86% of the total crimes in 2017.

24
Total number of
43
Total number of
persons sentenced persons sentenced
to death for murder to death for murder
involving sexual involving sexual
violence in 2016 violence in 2017

87
Total number of
51
Total number of
persons sentenced persons sentenced
to death for murder to death for murder
simpliciter in 2016 simpliciter in 2017

7 DEATH PENALTY IN INDIA–ANNUAL STATISTICS REPORT 2017

 ROBBERY
2017

AND MURDER

01 00
DRUG
2016

OFFENCE
01 02

UNKNOWN
03 00

RIOTING AND
MURDER
00 05

TERROR
05 05

DACOITY
AND MURDER
14 00

KIDNAPPING
AND MURDER
14 03

MURDER INVOLVING
SEXUAL VIOLENCE
24 43

MURDER
SIMPLICITER
87 51

8
death
warrant

In August 2017, death warrants were issued by the 3rd Additional

Sessions Judge, Jabalpur against two prisoners, Raja and Rajesh Yadav,
whose criminal appeals are currently pending in the Supreme Court.
Earlier that month, the Madhya Pradesh High Court had confirmed
their death sentences. Similarly, in 2016, death warrants were issued
for the execution of five prisoners before they had exhausted all their
legal options.
These warrants are in violation of the Supreme Court guideline laid
down in May 2015 for the issuance of death warrants in Shabnam v.
Union of India and Ors3. According to the guideline, Sessions Courts
can no longer issue death warrants for executions in undue haste,
without a hearing, secretly, or prematurely. This is to ensure that
all legal remedies of a prisoner on death row have been exhausted in
accordance with Shatrughan Chauhan v. Union of India4.
The confusion emerges because there is no corresponding provision in
the CrPC stipulating the exhaustion of all remedies as a prerequisite
for issuing death warrant. Sections 413 and 414 of the CrPC state that
upon the confirmation of a death sentence by the High Court, the
Sessions Court shall cause the order to be carried into effect by issuing
3. (2015) 6 SCC 702. a death warrant. Section 415 of the CrPC directs the postponement of
4. (2014) 3 SCC 1. the execution only till the appeal is pending in the Supreme Court.

9 DEATH PENALTY IN INDIA–ANNUAL STATISTICS REPORT 2017

“… However, in the statutory framework, further
procedural safeguards in the form of judicial
review as well as mercy petitions are yet to
be traversed. This would also be covered by
the expression procedure established by law
occurring in Article 21. Therefore, till the time
limitation period for filing the review petition
and thereafter reasonable time for filing the
mercy petition has not lapsed, issuing of death
warrants would be violative of Article 21.”
Operative part of the Supreme Court ruling
in Shabnam v. Union of India (para 12.3)
prohibiting issuance of death warrant before
exhaustion of all legal remedies.

390. The date for the execution of a sentence of

death confirmed by the High Court shall be fixed
by the Court of Sessions and such date shall be
the twenty–first day is a Sunday or other public
holiday, the next succeeding working day. The
date shall be specified in the warrant addressed
to the superintendent of the jail in which the
convict is confined.
Rule 390 of the Madhya Pradesh Rules and
Orders (Criminal) allowing the Sessions Court
to issue death warrants after the High Court
confirms the death sentence.

10
high court
in 2017

5. Over the years, all 11 prisoners Section 366 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, mandates that
accused in the highly publicized
every case where the Sessions Court imposes the death sentence has
Dandupalya case of 2010 have been
acquitted, commuted or have had their
to be sent to the High Court for confirmation. In 2017, the High
cases remitted to the Sessions Court. Courts in India disposed cases involving 99 prisoners, 26 more than
last year. High Court acquittals saw a significant increase in 2017,
6. Section 313 of the Code of Criminal
Procedure, 1973, provides an opportuni-
whereas the number of confirmations reduced. Overall the Karnataka
ty to the accused to explain any circum- High Court disposed 26 cases involving 26 prisoners (highest among
stances appearing in the evidence all the High Courts in India)- confirming the death sentences of 4
against him. prisoners, commuting 10, and acquitting 12. Of the 26 decided cases,
13 cases involved 7 prisoners accused in the Dandupalya case5. In 5
cases involving 22 death row prisoners, the High Courts of Calcutta,
Patna, and Karnataka sent the case back to the Sessions Court for
recording of accused person’s statement under Section 313 of the Code
of Criminal Procedure6.

73
Total cases
disposed by
99
Total cases
disposed by
High Courts High Courts
in 2016 in 2017

11 DEATH PENALTY IN INDIA–ANNUAL STATISTICS REPORT 2017

 high court 11 10
confirmations Total number Total number

in 2017
of prisoners of cases

No. of Prisoners
No. of Cases
Coram (No. of Cases)

Karnataka Madhya Pradesh Uttar Pradesh

(Bangalore Bench) (Jabalpur Bench) (Allahabad Bench)

03 03 03 02 03 03
Justices S.K. Seth and H.P. Singh(1) Justices Shashi Kant Gupta and
Justices Ravi Malimath and John
Prabhat Chandra Tripathi(1)
Michael Cunha (3) Justices S.K. Seth and Anjuli Palo(1)
Justices Arvind Kumar Tripathi
and Mukhtar Ahmad (2)

Chhattisgarh Karnataka
(Dharwad Bench)

01 01 01 01
Justices Pritinker Diwanker and Justices Anand Byrareddy and
Ram Prasanna Sharma(1) K. Somashekar(1)

12
 high court 53 30
commutations Total number Total number

in 2017
of prisoners of cases

No. of Prisoners
No. of Cases
Coram (No. of Cases)

Assam Bihar Delhi

03 01 02 02 01 01
Justices Ujjal Bhuyan and Justices Samarendra Pratap Singh Justices G.S. Sistani and
Paran Kumar Phukan(1) and Prakash Chandra Jaiswal(1) Vinod Goel(1)
Justices Samarendra Pratap Singh
and Arun Kumar(1)

Gujarat Jharkhand Karnataka

(Kalbaurgi Bench)

11 01 02 01 01 01
Justices Anant S. Dave Justices H.C. Mishra and Justices K.N. Phaneendra and
and G.R. Udhwani(1) Anand Sen(1) N.K. Sudhindrarao(1)

Karnataka Kerala Madhya Pradesh

(Bangalore Bench) (Jabalpur Bench)

09 06 02 02 06 03
Justices Ravi Malimath and Justices P.R. Ramachandra Justices J.K. Maheshwari and
John Michael Cunha (5) Menon and A. Hariprasad(1) Rajendra Mahajan(1)
Justices Anand Byrareddy and No information available(1) Justices S.K. Gangele & H.P.
K. Somashekar(1) Singh(1)
Justices S.K. Seth and Anjuli
Palo(1)

13 DEATH PENALTY IN INDIA–ANNUAL STATISTICS REPORT 2017

Maharashtra Orissa Rajasthan
(Aurangabad Bench) (Jodhpur Bench)

01 01 02 01 02 01
Justices S.S. Shinde(1) Justices I Mahanty and Justices Gopal Krishan Vyas and
Biswajit Mohanty(1) Deepak Maheshwari(1)

Rajasthan West Bengal Tamil Nadu

(Jaipur Bench)

01 01 02 02 03 02
Justices Mohammad Rafiq and Justices Nadira Patherya Justices P.N. Prakash and
Kailash Chandra Sharma(1) and Debi Prosad Dey(2) C.V. Karthikeyan(2)

Uttar Pradesh
(Allahabad Bench)

05 04
Justices Ramesh Sinha and
Umesh Chandra Srivastava(1)
Justices Bal Krishna Narayana
and Arvind Kumar Mishra(1)
Justices Arvind Kumar and
Shailendra Kumar Agrawal(1)
Justices Arvind Kumar Tripathi
and Mukhtar Ahmad(1)

14
 high court 35 24
acquittals Total number Total number

in 2017
of prisoners of cases

No. of Prisoners
No. of Cases
Coram (No. of Cases)

Bihar Karnataka Karnataka

(Bangalore Bench) (Kalbaurgi Bench)

05 01 11 14 01 01
Justices Samarendra Pratap Singh Justices Ravi Malimath and Justices Rathnakalaa and
and Arun Kumar(1) John Michael Cunha(14) N.K. Sudhindrarao(1)

Madhya Pradesh Madhya Pradesh Orissa

(Jabalpur Bench) (Indore Bench)

01 01 04 01 03 01
Justices S.K. Seth and Justices S.C. Sharma and Alok Justices I. Mahanty and
H.P. Singh(1) Verma(1) Biswajit Mohanty(1)

Tamil Nadu West Bengal Uttar Pradesh

(Allahabad Bench)

01 01 01 01 08 03
Justices P.N. Prakash and Justices Ashim Kumar Roy and Justices Bala Krishna Narayana
C.V. Karthikeyan(1) Malay Marut Banerjee(1) and Arvind Kumar Mishra(1)
Justices Bala Krishna Narayana
and Shashi Kant(1)
Justices Prashant Kumar and
Mahendra Dayal(1)

15
 2017 2016

high court Confirmation

in 2017 Acquittals

Commutation

15 11 44 53 14 35

16
commutations
under union of india
v. sriharan7
7. (2016) 7 SCC 1. In December 2015, a Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court in
8. Nanku v. State of Uttar Pradesh, Union of India v. Sriharan, laid down that life imprisonment can mean
Capital Case No. - 1435 of 2016 imprisonment for the remainder of one’s natural life. To this end, the
State Government’s power of remission under the Code of Criminal
Procedure can be excluded by the Supreme Court and the High
Courts.
In 2017, 10 out of 53 prisoners whose death penalty was commuted to
life imprisonment were sentenced under the Sriharan dicta. In these
cases, the respective High Courts stipulated a fixed term during which
the prisoner could not be granted statutory remission. In one case the
Allahabad High Court ruled out possibility of statutory remission for
the remainder of convict’s life8.

30 years 20 years Whole Life 30 years

1 Prisoner 1 Prisoner 1 Prisoner 1 Prisoner

Nanku v. State of
Lakhikanta Adhikary v. Uttar Pradesh Nitin Gaikwad v.
The State of West Bengal State of Maharashtra
Lal Chand Mia v.
Sentence State of West Bengal
imposed
under
Sriharan 2017
Date of Judgment 10th February 06th March 20th March

17 DEATH PENALTY IN INDIA–ANNUAL STATISTICS REPORT 2017

 Life imprisonment without possibility of remission till stipulated time.
Life imprisonment for the whole of the remaining natural life.

25 years 40 years 35 years 30 years

1 Prisoner 1 Prisoner 2 Prisoners 2 Prisoners

Mata Munda and

Bobby v. State of Ors. v. State of Orissa
Uttar Pradesh
Rasheed v. Kamaraj and Elangovan
State of Kerala v. State of Tamil Nadu

30th May 23rd June 25th October

06th June

18
supreme court
in 2017

9. (2017) 6 SCC 1. criminal appeals

10. The acquittals pertain to charges that Only one criminal appeal involving the death penalty was decided by
attract the death penalty. the Supreme Court in 2017. In Mukesh v. Govt. of NCT of Delhi9 (2012
Delhi gang-rape case) the Court upheld the death sentences of four
accused persons confirmed by the Delhi High Court in March 2014.
In comparison, the Supreme Court decided seven criminal appeals
in 2016, confirming none, commuting seven, and acquitting three
prisoners10.
In Mukesh the Supreme Court bench comprising Justices Dipak Misra
(as he then was), Ashok Bhushan, and R. Banumathi unanimously
confirmed the death sentence of Mukesh (24), Pawan (20), Vinay
(22), and Akshay (29). Interestingly, in an unprecedented order passed
on February 3, 2017 in this case, the Court granted defense counsel
access to the accused in prison for recording relevant mitigating
circumstances.

19 DEATH PENALTY IN INDIA–ANNUAL STATISTICS REPORT 2017

 confirmation in
death penalty cases
supreme court 2017

DATE OF
JUDGMENT 05.05.2017

04
rape and murder
(section 302, 376
and 377 of IPC)
No. of accused charged Charges

MUKESH AND ORS.

V. STATE OF NCT death sentence upheld
OF DELHI Sentence by Supreme Court
Name of case

justices dipak misra(as he then was),

ashok bhushan and r. banumathi
Coram

20
11. (2014) 9 SCC 737. review petitions
12. (2017) 6 SCC 631.
13. (2017) 8 SCC 518.
In September 2014, a Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court in
Mohd. Arif v. The Registrar, Supreme Court11 , declared that review peti-
tions in all death sentence cases are to be heard in open court.
In 2017, the Supreme Court decided two Review Petitions, upholding
the death sentences of three prisoners. A bench comprising Justices
Dipak Misra (as he then was), Rohinton Nariman, and Uday Umesh
Lalit dismissed the review petition in Vasanta Sampat Dupare v. State of
Maharashtra12 (May, 2017). It held that the aggravating factors, mainly
extreme depravity and young age of the victim, outweighed the miti-
gating circumstances brought on record.
In Vikram Singh and anr. v. State of Punjab13 (July, 2017), the bench com-
prising Justices Dipak Misra (as he then was), Ashok Bhushan, and R.
Banumathi, dismissed the review petition filed by two accused persons.
They were convicted for kidnapping and killing the victim with an
anesthesia overdose in 2005. Their criminal appeal was dismissed by
the Supreme Court in 2010. Interestingly, their review petition was
dismissed earlier in 2011. However, the accused approached the Court
again to reopen their review petition in open court in terms of the
judgment in Mohd. Arif.

21 DEATH PENALTY IN INDIA–ANNUAL STATISTICS REPORT 2017

 review petition in
death penalty cases
supreme court 2017

DATE OF
JUDGMENT 03.05.2017
VASANTA SAMPAT
DUPARE V. STATE
rape and murder
OF MAHARASHTRA (section 302 and
section 376 of IPC)
Name of case

Charges
justices Dipak Misra
(as he then was),
Rohinton Nariman,
Uday Umesh Lalit death sentence upheld
Coram Sentence by Supreme Court

DATE OF
JUDGMENT 07.07.2017
VIKRAM SINGH
AND ANR. V. STATE
abduction and murder
OF PUNJAB (section 302 and section
364A of IPC)
Name of case

Charges
justices Dipak Misra
(as he then was),
Ashok Bhushan,
R. Banumathi death sentence upheld
Coram Sentence by Supreme Court

22
president’s exercise
of clemency power
in 2017

14. President’s Secretariat Website, Avail- Article 72 of the Indian Constitution gives the President the power to
able at http://rashtrapatisachivalaya.gov. grant clemency to convicted prisoners. The former President, Pranab
in/archive/mercy-petitionpdf.
Mukherjee, before the end of his term on 24th July 2017, commuted
15. ‘Govt lost mercy petition of 4 Maoist the death sentences of four prisoners14. All four prisoners had been
convicts on death row’, Hindustan Times, sentenced to death in 2001 for events arising out of the Bara massacre
July 31, 2015.
of February 1992. The commutation came 14 years after the confirma-
16. ‘History in the Making? Pranab Mukher- tion of their sentence by the Supreme Court. In the past, reports had
jee Rejects Government Advice on Death Row emerged suggesting that the State and the Central governments had
Convicts’, The Wire, January 23, 2017.
lost the record of their mercy petitions which were filed in 200315.
More recently, a few newspapers reported that the President commut-
ed their sentence against the advice of the Ministry of Home Affairs16.
Overall, the President of India disposed 9 mercy petitions during 2017,
as compared to 6 during 2016. In 2017, 5 out of the 9 disposed peti-
tions were rejected and the other 4 were commuted. In comparison,
in 2016, only one prisoner was commuted by the President and mercy
petitions of 5 prisoners were rejected.

23 DEATH PENALTY IN INDIA–ANNUAL STATISTICS REPORT 2017

Name of the Prisoner Date of Sessions Date of Supreme Date of Disposal Decision
Court Sentence Court Confirmation of Mercy Petition

Krishna Mochi 08.06.2001 15.04.2002 01.01.2017 Commuted

Nanhe Lal Mochi 08.06.2001 15.04.2002 01.01.2017 Commuted

Bir Kuer Paswan 08.06.2001 15.04.2002 01.01.2017 Commuted

Dharmendra Singh @Dharu 08.06.2001 15.04.2002 01.01.2017 Commuted

Babu @ Ketan 26.04.2013 06.01.2015 25.05.2017 Rejected

Jitendra @ Jeetu 26.04.2013 06.01.2015 25.05.2017 Rejected

Sanni @ Devendra 26.04.2013 06.01.2015 25.05.2017 Rejected

Purushottam Dashrath Borate 20.03.2012 08.05.2015 26.05.2017 Rejected

Pradeep Yeshwant Kokade 20.03.2012 08.05.2015 26.05.2017 Rejected

24
State-wise Distribution of 2016 2017

Prisoners on Death Row

399 371
Total number of Total number of
Prisoners on Death Prisoners on Death
Row as on 31st Row as on 31st
December 2016 December 2017

11 Jammu & Kashmir

12 Jammu & Kashmir 77 65

11 10 39 31

Uttar Pradesh

Uttar Pradesh
06 Punjab
13

West Bengal
Punjab
03

Jharkhand
Jharkhand
05

West Bengal
Uttrakhand
29 29
26 26 02
05 Uttrakhand
13

Assam
Haryana
17

Tripura
Bihar

Bihar
Haryana
10 Delhi
10 Delhi

11 Rajasthan

15 Rajasthan

37 Madhya Pradesh

27 Madhya Pradesh

14 Gujarat

05 Gujarat
Odisha 08
47 Maharashtra Chhattisgarh 06
Chhattisgrah 08
67 Maharashtra

Telangana 06
Telangana 06
01 Andhra Pradesh
02 Andhra Pradesh

27 Karnataka

12 Karnataka
Tamil Nadu 05
Tamil Nadu 11
20 Kerala

18 Kerala Army Act17 11

Army Act 17
11

25 DEATH PENALTY IN INDIA–ANNUAL STATISTICS REPORT 2017

legal & political
developments
in 2017

�. delhi gang rape case–mitigation order

On 3 February, 2017 a three-judge bench of the Supreme Court headed
by Justice Dipak Misra (as he then was) passed an order in Mukesh v.
Govt. of NCT of Delhi18 (2012 Delhi gang-rape case) granting defense
counsel the opportunity to gather all relevant mitigating evidence
to be taken into consideration during sentencing. The court allowed
defense counsel access to the accused, for two hours daily in a separate
room, for over a fortnight. The Supreme Court recognised that neither
the Sessions Court nor the Delhi High Court had undertaken individ-
ualized sentencing.
This is a significant step towards ensuring an adequate mitigation
exercise in capital cases. Usually, there is very little material presented
during sentencing. This condition is worsened as the legal represen-
tatives are granted limited time for meeting prisoners with no privacy
for confidential conversations. Sessions Courts routinely conduct
final arguments on conviction and sentence in the same hearing in
17. 11 prisoners for 2016 and 2017 have not
been classified state-wise as they were
violation of the law, and without regard to the time and preparation
sentenced to death under the Army Act, required for an effective sentencing hearing. In a positive develop-
1950. The status of these cases are cur- ment, the Supreme Court set a separate date for hearing arguments
rently unknown. on sentencing after granting sufficient time for counsel to collect
18. (2017) 6 SCC 1. evidence on sentencing.

26
 �. india’s vote against unhrc resolution
on the question of the death penalty
On 29 September 2017, the United Nations Human Rights Coun-
cil passed a resolution on ‘‘the question of the death penalty’’ (A/
HRC/36/L.6) with 27 votes in favour, 13 against and 7 abstentions19.
The resolution notably called for protecting the rights of foreign
nationals, and minorities facing death penalty, ensuring that it is not
imposed based on discriminatory application of law, and affording
equal access to justice to the economically vulnerable, among other
safeguards. India was one of the 13 members that voted against
this resolution20.

19. UN Human Rights Council comprises of

The resolution emphasized the importance of providing consular
47 seats, filled by member states for access to those facing the death penalty abroad and condemned the
three year terms. use of the death penalty as a sanction for offenses such as apostasy,
20. The Wire, “India Votes Against UN
blasphemy, adultery, and consensual same-sex relationships. India’s
Move on Death Penalty That May Have vote against the resolution is in line with its statement on March 1st
Helped Jadhav”, October 4, 2017. at the 34th session of the Human Rights Council. At the High Level
21. The Wire, “India Votes Against UN Panel Discussion on the Death Penalty, Ambassador Virander Paul re-
Move on Death Penalty That May Have iterated India’s stance against any curtailment of its sovereign powers
Helped Jadhav”, October 4, 2017. in matters related to the death penalty21.

27 DEATH PENALTY IN INDIA–ANNUAL STATISTICS REPORT 2017

 . mode of execution writ
On October 6th, the Supreme Court heard a writ petition22 filed by
Advocate Rishi Malhotra under Article 32 of the Constitution that
challenged the validity of Section 354(5) of the Code of Criminal Pro-
cedure, 1973 which mandates hanging as a method of execution. The
section was challenged on the grounds that it violates the right to life
with dignity guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution.
The petitioner referred to various sources to contend that hanging,
as a mode of execution, is highly technical, prone to error, and if not
properly executed may lead to extreme pain and suffering. He relied
on the 35th Law Commission Report and the case of Deena v. Union
of India to contend that capital punishment must be quick, simple,
humane, predictable, and cause as little suffering as possible. Further-
more, the petitioner compared hanging unfavorably to other modes of
execution, such as shooting and lethal injection, to posit that it is inor-
dinately cruel and therefore violative of the right to life with dignity.
On these grounds, it was prayed that i) Section 354(5) should be struck
down as violative of Article 21 of the Constitution and ii) the right to
die by means a dignified procedure of death should be considered an
integral component of Article 21. Following the writ, a Bench led by
Chief Justice Dipak Misra, issued notice to the government to find
22. Writ Petition(s) (Criminal) No(s). alternatives to hanging which are painless as the primary mode of
145/2017. carrying out the death penalty.

28
 �. indian penal code (madhya pradesh
amendment) bill, ����
On 4 December 2017, the Madhya Pradesh Legislative Assembly unan-
imously passed a bill to amend the Indian Penal Code (IPC) in order to
prescribe the death penalty for those convicted of raping girls aged 12
and below23.
The “Public Safety Bill” as it has been dubbed, stipulates for addition
of Section 376AA and 376DA. Section 376AA, specifically categorizes
the rape of a woman 12 or below as an offence punishable by death or
rigorous imprisonment of not less than 14 years which may extend to
imprisonment until the end of natural life. Section 376DA prescribes
death or rigorous imprisonment of not less than 20 years which may
extend to imprisonment until the end of natural life to each member
23. “Death Penalty for rape of girls aged of a group that has raped a woman who is 12 or below24.
12 and below: MP Assembly passes Bill”, The
Hindu, December 4, 2017.
Since the amendment bill passed by the Madhya Pradesh Assembly
seeks to amend a central legislation (IPC), it will require the assent of
24. Currently Section 376 of the IPC pro-
the President of India under Article 254(2) of the Constitution.
vides for imprisonment of life as the max-
imum punishment for the offence of rape. According to NCRB statistics, in 2015, Madhya Pradesh had the
Section 376-A and 376-E of the IPC provide
highest recorded number of rapes and the second highest number of
for the death penalty as the maximum pun-
ishment for the offence of rape in certain
cases recorded under the Protection of Children from Sexual Of-
circumstances. Section 376-A provides for fences Act, 2012. The proposed amendments were heralded by Chief
punishment for rape causing death or re- Minister Shivraj Singh Chouhan who has vocally supported the idea of
sulting in persistent vegetative state; and introducing extreme punishment to combat sexual offences. However,
Section 376-E provides for death penalty
several human rights and child rights activists criticized this move
to repeat offenders. Currently the maximum
punishment stipulated under Protection of
citing the ineffectiveness of the capital punishment as a deterrent25.
Children against Sexual Offences Act, 2012 The Justice Verma Committee had also opposed the use of the death
(POCSO) is life imprisonment. penalty for sexual offences26.

29 DEATH PENALTY IN INDIA–ANNUAL STATISTICS REPORT 2017

 �. up excise (amendment) ordinance, ����
The UP Excise (Amendment) Bill, 2017, was passed by the Uttar
Pradesh Assembly on 22 December 2017. The Bill has introduced
Section 60A to enforce the crackdown of illicit liquor/hooch manu-
factured and sold within the state. The newly added section provides
for imprisonment for life or fine of Rs. 10 lakhs or both or the death
penalty as punishment in cases where death has been caused due to
consumption of illicit liquor.
According to UP Excise Minister Jai Pratap Singh, the death penalty
provision will be applied depending upon the intensity of the case.
Through this amendment, UP became the third state in India, after
Gujarat and Bihar, to introduce the death penalty in response to
deaths caused by sale of hooch.

�. kulbhushan jadhav
On 10 April, 2017, following a Field General Court Martial, Kulbhu-
shan Jadhav was sentenced to death in Pakistan. He has been accused
of espionage. As a result, the Government of India approached the
International Court of Justice (ICJ) for provisional measures, alleging
violation of right to consular access under international law (Article
36 of the Vienna Convention on Consular Relation, 1963) against
25. “Activists Thrash Madhya Pradesh Bill the Government of Pakistan. On 18 May, 2017, the ICJ unanimously
Giving Death to Child Rapists”, The Week, accepted India’s request for interim relief and directed Pakistan to stay
December 6, 2017. Kulbhushan Jadhav’s execution till it delivers the final judgment in the
26. “Verma panel says no to death penalty”, case. The ICJ will now rule on India’s substantive request for reversing
The Hindu, January 23, 2013. Jadhav’s conviction and release.

30
 �. state responses to ���nd law commission
report on the death penalty:
In its 262nd report, released in August 2015, the Law Commission of
India recommended abolition of the death penalty except in terror
cases. Since all matters relating to criminal procedure fall under the
Concurrent List given in the Seventh Schedule of the Constitution of
India, the Central as well as State governments have to accept or reject
the recommendations. We have been tracking the responses of the
State governments to assess the policy-making process in the criminal
justice system. According to the information provided in an RTI re-
sponse by the Ministry of Home Affairs, Government of India, eleven
States and three Union Territories have furnished their responses
(States - Chhattisgarh, Gujarat, Goa, Jharkhand, Karnataka, Kerala,
Manipur, Mizoram, Sikkim, Tripura and Delhi; Union Territories -
Dadra and Nagar Haveli, Daman and Diu and Lakshadweep).
We also filed RTIs to the Home Departments of these States and
Union Territories to study the text of the responses. We have found
that Chhattisgarh, Goa, Mizoram, Delhi and Lakshadweep are inter-
ested in retaining the death penalty, Karnataka is in agreement with
the conclusion of the 262nd Law Commission report; Gujarat recom-
mends retaining the death penalty in its present form or replacing
capital punishment with imprisonment for life without commutation
or remission; and Tripura is in favour of complete abolition.

31 DEATH PENALTY IN INDIA–ANNUAL STATISTICS REPORT 2017

final
observations

In review, 2017 has been a year that presents significant challenges for
the study of the death penalty in India. While there has been a drop of
nearly 27% in the number of prisoners sentenced to death by Sessions
Courts in 2017 (compared to 2016), there have been significant legis-
lative developments that expand the role of the death penalty in the
Indian penological imagination.
An overview reveals that legislative efforts by one state to introduce
the death penalty for certain crimes encouraged other states to adopt
similar strategies. After Madhya Pradesh introduced legislation that
prescribed the death penalty for the rape of minor girls, the govern-
ments of Rajasthan27 and Karnataka28 announced plans to bring
similar legislation into force. The Uttar Pradesh government’s decision
in 2017 to bring in the death penalty for dealing in spurious liquor
relied on a similar move by the Bihar Government in 2016. Soon after
the Uttar Pradesh Assembly passed the bill in December 2017, the
government of Madhya Pradesh announced plans to introduce an
equivalent bill.
State-specific movements in the death row population on both ends of
the spectrum saw interesting developments. At the end of 2017, Maha-
rashtra recorded a net increase of 20 death row prisoners bringing its
death row population to 67. This is a significant development because
27. “Rajasthan Government Contemplates
Maharashtra now has the highest death row population in India,
Death Penalty for Minors”, The Times of In- overtaking Uttar Pradesh whose overall population is nearly twice of
dia, December 14, 2017. Maharashtra’s. On the other hand, Karnataka’s death row population
28. “After Madhya Pradesh, Karnataka Plans was reduced from 27 to 12 (the highest reduction in the country) on
a Law to Give Death Penalty To Rapists for the back of commutations and acquittals by the Karnataka High Court
Minor Girls”, Outlook, December 24, 2017. mainly in the Dandupalya case.

32
Website: www.deathpenaltyindia.com; www.nludelhi.ac.in
Email: deathpenalty@nludelhi.ac.in
Twitter: @deathpen_nlud