Hanging as a Constitutional Mode of Execution in India

Syllabus: GS2/Polity

Context

• Recently, the Supreme Court of India has upheld the constitutional validity of hanging as a mode of executing a death sentence, holding that the method does not violate the right to dignity under Article 21.

About ‘Hanging as a Mode of Execution in India’

• Hanging has been the principal statutory method of execution in India since the colonial-era Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC).
• The present Section 393(5) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023 provides that a death sentence shall direct that the person ‘be hanged by the neck till he is dead’.
• The method generally uses a calculated long drop, intended to cause cervical fracture and rapid loss of consciousness.
• Its constitutional validity was upheld earlier in Deena v. Union of India (1983).

Constitutional & Legal Aspects

• Article 21 guarantees the right to life and personal liberty and requires procedure established by law to be fair and non-arbitrary.
• In Gian Kaur v. State of Punjab (1996), the Supreme Court recognised that the right to life includes the idea of living and, where relevant, dying with dignity.
• The constitutional question is therefore whether execution can be carried out with decency, dignity and without unnecessary brutality.
• The Law Commission’s 187th Report (2003) recommended an alternative method of execution through lethal injection, while recognising the need for further consideration of execution practices.
• However, Parliament retained hanging under the BNSS, providing legislative continuity to the existing framework.

Recent Supreme Court Decision

• The Supreme Court of India found that the scientific material placed before it did not sufficiently displace the reasoning in Deena (1983).
• It noted that alternatives such as lethal injection, electrocution, lethal gas or shooting had not been demonstrated to provide a clear constitutional or humanitarian advantage.
• The Court did not treat the issue as permanently closed and recognised that constitutional interpretation and scientific knowledge can evolve and that fresh evidence could justify reconsideration.

Related Concerns & Issues

• Scientific Reliability: Incorrect calculation of the drop may result in prolonged asphyxiation or, at the other extreme, severe physical injury
• Dignity Under Article 21: The State’s obligation to protect dignity does not end at the gallows.
• Psychological Suffering: Death-row confinement and the anticipation of execution raise separate human-rights concerns.
• Colonial Legacy: Retaining a method originating in colonial criminal law raises questions about whether contemporary constitutional values require reform.
• Alternative Methods: The relative reliability, pain and dignity implications of lethal injection and other methods require independent empirical assessment.
• Death Penalty Itself: The debate also intersects with concerns regarding arbitrariness, proportionality, wrongful convictions and the irreversible nature of capital punishment.

Global Examples of Hanging as a Mode of Execution

• Hanging has largely declined internationally. It has nevertheless remained legally available or historically used in some jurisdictions, including Japan, Singapore and certain countries in the Middle East and Asia.
• Several countries have abolished capital punishment altogether, reflecting a broader global movement towards restriction or abolition.

Way Forward

• Commission updated medical and scientific studies on execution methods.
• Establish transparent, evidence-based protocols and safeguards to minimise suffering.
• Examine the Law Commission’s recommendations and internationally accepted human-rights standards.
• Periodically review the statutory method in light of Article 21 and evolving constitutional morality.
• Strengthen safeguards against wrongful execution and ensure that the death penalty remains subject to the strictest judicial scrutiny.

Source: IE