Supreme Court bench relating to the procedural norms for imposing the death sentence

Supreme Court bench relating to the procedural norms for imposing the death sentence.

Subject: Polity

Context:

The Supreme Court recently referred to a larger Bench issue relating to procedural norms for imposing the death sentence. The intervention is seen as a major step in plugging gaps in the way in which trial courts award the death sentence.

Procedure for awarding death sentence:

Section 235 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) requires a judge to hear the accused after conviction on the question of sentence, and then pass sentence on him according to law.

Previous SC judgements:

• Bachan Singh v State of Punjab(1980)– a separate sentencing hearing should be held, where a judge would be persuaded on why the death sentence need not be awarded.
• Dattaraya v State of Maharashtra(2020)– For effective hearing under Section 235(2) of the CrPC, the suggestion that the court intends to impose death penalty should specifically be made to the accused, to enable the accused to make an effective representation against death sentence, by placing mitigating circumstances before the Court.
• The SC order referring the issue to a larger bench lists social milieu, the age, educational levels, whether the convict had faced trauma earlier in life, family circumstances, psychological evaluation of a convict and post-conviction conduct, as relevant circumstances that should be accounted for at the sentencing hearing.