The government is contemplating creating an expert group to look into if there is a less painful way to execute death row inmates than hanging by the neck, the Centre told the Supreme Court on Tuesday.
Attorney General (AG) R. Venkataramani made the following submission on behalf of the Centre before a bench that included Justice J.B. Pardiwala and Chief Justice of India D.Y. Chandrachud: “Deliberations are ongoing; if the court takes up the matter after a week, then I can return with a response.”
We are trying to create a committee, as I recommended, and are collecting names, he said.
When Venkataramani made his statement, the Chief Justice noted that “the AG states that the government is considering the appointment of committee” and set a new hearing date for the case for July.
On March 21, the Supreme Court said that it was willing to organise an expert group and asked the Centre to start a debate and gather pertinent data in order to determine if there is a less painful way to carry out the death sentence than hanging by the neck.
One possibility, according to a bench presided over by the Chief Justice, is to examine the situation from the perspective of science and technology.
He continued by asking, “Based on current knowledge of technology and science, is there a method which is consistent with human dignity and socially acceptable?”
Do we have any information on the circumstances surrounding the execution of a death sentence via other techniques, either in India or abroad? The bench asked.
The Supreme Court was considering a writ petition filed by attorney Rishi Malhotra, seeking a directive to invalidate Section 354(5) of the Criminal Procedure Code because it violates the Constitution, especially Article 21, is discriminatory, and is also in violation of the ruling rendered by the Constitution Bench in the Gian Kaur case.
Malhotra has said that he is contesting the way the death penalty is carried out in India—by hanging the inmate by the neck till they pass away.
The argument stated: “The Right to Life would involve the existence of such a right up to the end of natural life, including the Right to Live with Human Dignity. This involves the right to a decent existence, including a respectful manner of passing away, up to the moment of death. In other words, this can also encompass a man’s right to pass away peacefully when his life ends.
The petitioner argued that the person whose life must end due to the conviction and the sentence should not be forced to endure the torture of hanging. The supreme court agreed, and in October 2017 it gave notice to the Centre.
