The Supreme Court, on Monday (December 9), ruled that excessive delays in the execution of death sentences have a dehumanizing impact on convicts. It emphasized that when such delays are caused by factors beyond the prisoners’ control, the death sentence should be commuted to life imprisonment.
Constitutional Protection Under Article 21
“It is well established that Article 21 of the Constitution extends beyond the pronouncement of the sentence and applies to its execution as well. An unexplained and excessive delay in the execution of a death sentence has a dehumanizing effect on the accused. When such delays are caused by circumstances outside the prisoners’ control, it mandates the commutation of the death sentence,” the Court observed.
The bench, comprising Justice Abhay Oka, Justice Ahsanuddin Amanullah, and Justice Augustine George Masih, laid down critical principles for the judiciary and executive authorities to ensure the constitutional rights of death row convicts under Article 21 are upheld.
Dismissing Maharashtra’s Appeals
These observations were made while dismissing appeals filed by the State of Maharashtra against a 2019 Bombay High Court decision. The High Court had commuted the death sentences of Purshottam Borate and Pradeep Kokade, convicted in the 2007 gang rape and murder of a 22-year-old Pune BPO employee, to life imprisonment with a fixed term of 35 years. The Supreme Court had earlier raised concerns over procedural lapses and delays in the case before reserving judgment.
Right to Challenge Delay
The Court reaffirmed that convicts experiencing undue, unexplained delays in the execution of death sentences could seek relief under Article 32 of the Constitution. However, it clarified that such petitions would not reopen the judicial findings upholding the death penalty. Instead, the Court would focus solely on the delay’s nature and circumstances post-confirmation of the sentence.
“Undue, unexplained, and inordinate delays in execution allow the convict to approach this Court under Article 32. However, the Court’s jurisdiction is limited to examining the delay and its impact after the final confirmation of the death sentence,” the Court stated.
Psychological Impact of Delays
Highlighting the psychological toll, the Court observed that prolonged consideration of mercy petitions by constitutional authorities creates severe mental and physical distress for convicts. It held that such delays are a violation of Article 21 and cannot be justified by the gravity of the crime.
“Keeping a convict in suspense while mercy petitions are under consideration for an inordinately long period causes immense agony. This Court must consider such delays as a violation of Article 21 and not excuse them based solely on the severity of the crime,” it added.
Role of the Sessions Court
The Court criticized inordinate delays by Sessions Courts in issuing execution warrants under Sections 413 and 414 of the CrPC, stating that such delays exacerbate the convict’s mental and physical anguish, violating their rights under Article 21.
Case-Specific Evaluation of Delay
The Court stressed that what constitutes an “inordinate” or “undue” delay must be determined on a case-by-case basis, factoring in the specific circumstances and the convict’s suffering.
High Courts and Executive Responsibility
The Supreme Court clarified that convicts may also invoke the High Courts’ jurisdiction under Article 226 to challenge delays in execution. High Courts are required to apply the same principles established by the Supreme Court. Additionally, the Court directed executive authorities to expedite the processing of mercy petitions and ensure that all relevant documents are forwarded to the Governor or President without unnecessary delay.
Guidelines for Preventing Delays
The Court issued detailed procedural guidelines for the judiciary and executive to streamline the handling of mercy petitions and the execution process, aiming to minimize unnecessary delays.
Case Details:
Case No.: Crl.A. No. 2831-2832/2023
Title: State of Maharashtra and Ors. v. Pradeep Yashwant Kokade and Anr. with connected case
