The Supreme Court on Thursday concluded a pivotal session on reforming death penalty execution methods, reserving judgment after sharp exchanges between petitioner and government counsel. This development underscores ongoing tensions between tradition and human rights in India’s justice system.
Filed by senior counsel Rishi Malhotra back in 2017, the petition labels hanging as an archaic cruelty that subjects inmates to undue torment. Malhotra advocated lethal injection, citing medical evidence of its humane efficacy—drugs that rapidly induce unconsciousness followed by cardiac arrest.
He called for empowering convicts with a choice, a practice gaining traction internationally as nations phase out more painful methods. India’s continued reliance on hanging, per the new BNSS, stands in stark contrast.
Government representatives countered by noting a dedicated committee’s ongoing review but insisted hanging’s reliability precludes immediate change. They stressed procedural safeguards that make it the preferred option.
The court, however, voiced frustration, declaring the Constitution demands evolution towards kinder practices. Justices highlighted dignity in death as integral to Articles 21’s right to life, urging the state to prioritize compassion.
Spanning several years with repeated listings, the case now awaits written arguments within 21 days. As India confronts its death row realities—over 500 awaiting execution—this ruling could herald a humane pivot, influencing policy and public discourse on capital punishment’s moral boundaries.