The debate on capital punishment has been running over the past so many decades, but yet nothing

concrete is coming up. Many may be satisfied with the present legislation on giving of capital punishment but to many of us its still not serving the purpose that it is deemed to serve. Is it actually working as a deterrent to crime? Which as far as our understanding goes is increasing day by day. History is evidence to the fact that capital punishment has never acted and would never act as deterrence to crime. Would it be right to say that its more like another divide between the rich and the poor? Till date the capital punishments have only acted as deterrence for those families who could hardly earn bread and butter forget about hiring a smart lawyer who could effectively play with the facts of the case to serve his clients. Only few months back a man named Dhannajay was given capital punishment for raping and then killing a minor girl. His act as such was brutal calling for severe action against him, but it seems that the ends of justice have not actually been met out. So many cases of murder go not unnoticed but without any punishment to the doer only because he has money to meet out whatever expenditure might come in defending his case. Be it by influencing or so to say compensating the families of those killed or hiring an efficient lawyer to prove the case in their favor. Talk about so many politicians engrossed form top to bottom in so may corrupt t activities known to every one still go out of the Court smiling. The rarest of the rare principal embodied by the S.C. of India in the case of Bachan Singh vs. State of Punjab in giving of capital punishment seems to have been applied only when the defendant is a unprivileged person coming from that strata of the society where people do anything to earn bread and illiteracy has only caused misery. Not than the Court wants to do injustice to these persons but the fact that they are not capable of fighting their case because they cannot hire a lawyer who has master minded the provisions of Article 21 of the Constitution of India to save his client. Nor has he the money to change the evidences against him as has happened recently in so many cases before us where we knew the culprit, where even the Judge is himself so shure of the culprit but yet the culprit goes off scotfree because of lack of evidences against him. In order to do justice to one person we cannot do injustice to so many others. Why should the innocent family of the rapist suffer for an act for which he the culprit is the only one responsible? Moreover would capital punishment really bring justice? Thanks to the idea of capital punishment that an easier way to do away with the crime has been found by the doers of the heinous crime.

To kill the victim throw her somewhere and move away and if lucky enough then the crime would never be traced back to the offender. The cardinal question to be asked here is are the circumstances of the crime as such that there is no alternative but to impose death sentence? Hindu dharma talks of nark for evil doers, Muslim talks of jhanum and Christianity talks of hell for evildoers but at the same time without any exception every religion talks of reforms. Giving a chance to the culprit to compensate the victim would go a long way in reforming the person. Moreover Social protestation towards such things would also help in the long run. The unfortunate part is that even the law is very restricted and limited in its definition about rape. Section 375 of the IPC.,1860, specifies that sexual intercourse comprises rape wherein penetration alone suffice to constitute that sexual intercourse which amounts to offence of rape. Least heed has been paid to the fact that rape is much wider a term and as such should be given a much wider interpretation. Though giving it a wider interpretation may call for some difficulty but a solution should be devised if we want to completely do away with this phenomenon of outraging a females modesty. The definition does makes it easy for the plaintiff to prove her case. In the given society a gargantuan amount of social stigma is attached with the concept. Even if rape is not done in the strict sense of Section 375 of IPC, the prima facie impression of rape having been committed does an equal harm to the victim. Not always may it be possible to prove the case beyond doubt that a rape has been committed if we go according to the strict interpretation of Section 375 of IPC. An empirical study manifest that people who have been meted out with capital punishment in India were poor or in minority or both. Nonetheless we do not intend to take sides all that we are trying to say that if justice is to be delivered it should undoubtedly be fair and reasonable. Justice should mean justice. An overall rethinking about it as a societal as well as legal issue is required. Also if torture is deemed best for the rapist then, why not this torture be constructive? For instance, the convicted can be made to compensate the victim or her family by his income through employment or community services. The act of rape is the most heinous crimes against the humans so the punishment should also be very painful. So that others fear the crime.

Even if all this sound a bit dissatisfactory to the victim of rape or her family then it is submitted that capital punishment is quite a merciful punishment for a crime as heinous as rape. Why should the rapist be killed with a pain of just two seconds contrary to the victim who in a society like ours would still live with so much shame and un-acceptance? If the girl has to continue with this stigma throughout out her life let the rapist also live with the stigma of rapist. He should be made to suffer equally, if not to avenge then at least to strike a balance. Many Indians, as well as right-wing political parties, including the opposition Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), are now calling for the death penalty for rapists. In the wake of the killing of the young woman last December, who died after being raped by a group of men on a bus, the government appointed a three-person panel to look into the possibility of enhancing the penalties for rape and introducing quicker trials for sexual crimes -currently, the maximum sentence for rape is life in prison, under the Indian Penal Code enacted in 1860 and largely unchanged since. However, many rapes are not prosecuted in India. The Justice Verma Committee, headed by former chief justice of India J.S. Verma, includes Leila Seth, former chief justice of the state of Himachal Pradesh, and Gopal Subramaniam, former solicitor general of India. The committee, formed on Dec. 24, received more than 6,000 emails before it held its first meeting on Dec. 26, and it continued to accept suggestions until Jan. 5. The panel has to make recommendations to the government within 30 days of concluding its work. It is unlikely, however, that its executive, led by the center-left Congress Party, will recommend the death penalty for rapists. Life Imprisonment Is More Severe 1. The death sentence is for the rarest of the rare cases While theres no doubt that rape is a heinous crime, it is unfortunately quite common. If we award the death sentence for rape, theres a danger well become comfortable with the idea of killing people through sheer habit. Well get used to the idea that the state can legally kill people and in my judgment, that isnt healthy. Already people like Baba Ramdev are advocating the death sentence for corruption. How far do we go before we become okay with the state killing people off? 2. More women will be murdered The death sentence for rape will end up being a death sentence for the rape victims. Whats to stop the rapist from making sure she never talks? As of now, killing someone

is a greater crime than raping them. The punishment for most murders isnt death, and to my mind this will give rapists a license to kill off their victims to make sure they dont talk. 3. Whats the sentence for even greater crimes? The idea of differing sentences is to make graver crimes have stiffer punishments. While theres no doubt that rape is a grave crime, there are other crimes that are even worse. The Nithari killings come to mind where Koli raped and murdered six children. To my mind that is a more serious crime than a single act of rape and the sentence must reflect that. Kohli got the death sentence since it was an unspeakably brutal act and was also extremely rare. If every rape gets a death sentence, what sentence do we give people like Kohli? Torture? 4. Do we want justice or revenge? In a civilized society, we gradually move from the concept of punishment to one of reform. Only when the court senses that a person is too far gone for reform does it even begin to consider a death sentence. This is sure to provoke strong responses, but do we really feel that no rapist can ever change? That theyre a foregone conclusion? 5. No space for mistakes As it stands, there are many elements that go into proving a rape. With rape cases getting the death sentence, the burden of proof will be raised much higher once you kill someone you can never bring them back. All the protections that women have begun to obtain from the law such as getting the benefit of the doubt, not having to be questioned too much etc, will be thrown out the window. When a persons life is at stake, the prosecution will have the right to use the maximum and strongest defense possible. This will surely lead to an even lower conviction of rape cases than we have at present. Moreover, courts themselves will be forced to take longer to decide taking someones life isnt a thing one does in a few months. I can imagine why this is an emotional topic for a lot of people and even after reading the above, many might feel that death is an appropriate punishment. What do you think?