LITERATURE REVIEW

Bhumika N. (2012). Had written in her article whether death penalty violating
under article 19, 14 and 21of the Indian constitution. Krishna Ayer judge express their
view in Rajendra Prasad case death penalty is violated of article 14, 19 and 21of the
Indian constitution. One more Jagmohan Singh case death penalty could not violated
under article 19 of the Indian constitution. I agree with the Hon‟ble Krishna Ayer death
penalty is violated under article 14, 19 and 21 of the Indian constitution. Death penalty is
not rule it is exception I am going through of this judgment today we need to unanimous
judgment to secure and protect the people and society.

Shallu B.A. (2010) has written in her article no one shall deprived of his life
except to procedure established by law under article 21 of the constitution of India and it
is postulates person deprived of his life in procedure reasonable fair and just procedure
death penalty a person depriving of his life. Dr. Shallu has explained Rajiv Gandhi in the
year 1991in this case twenty six accused guilty committing crime under the POTA
act1987 death sentence them in the year 1998.The supreme court in the 1999. The Rajiv
Gandhi‟s killer is waiting their execution. The president has not yet taking decision on
mercy petition social economical background of the person. One of the point delays in
execution of the death sentence which considered the delay in the mercy petition disposal
against the principle of rule of law.

M.B.Biradar (2012) has written in his article about the rights of a man such as
social right and cultural right, natural right as well as right to live death sentenced
condemns or curtails most of these rights. The human rights organization as improve the
quality of life rather than finish life .Death penalty is not necessary no person is never a
born criminal and everyman is born good but some circumstances or fanatism compel
him to commit crime. In criminal jurisprudence said „Hate the crime and not the
criminal‟. There are many reasons in death penalty against the human rights as well as the
abolition of the death penalty „every saint has his past and every sinner has his future‟.
Offence of death penalty is murder, highway dacoit, robbery, atrocities on women and
child gang rape internet obscenity and economical offences or white collar offences. The
first sentence will be to award life imprisonment and not death sentence India has
retained the capital punishment in certain cases but the basic human right to life is well
protected under the constitution.

Prerna D. S. (2013) has written in her article case death sentence is the law and
the policy of rarest of the rare she has referred Bachan Singh case law and Human right
activities and NGOs are against the death punishment and the international convention on
civil and political rights suggest countries move abolition of crime . It is very correct to
define that motive of the punishment ought to be abolish crime and not the criminals life
imprisonment is the rule and death sentence is an exception .She further give example of
few cases which have been declared as „rarest of the rare „case . Secondly swami
Shraddananda V/S State Of Karnataka court held that accused murdered his wife cold
blooded and it had been pre-planned the court should consider and investigate and
reasons behind the crime capital punishment should be considered as last option and
should not awarded first for public pressure and political significance cold blood and in
collude manner murdered and crimes against women, especially from personal religious
caste based reasons and revengeful attitude should be very severely punished.

Anoop K. (2013) had written in his article the society has an angry cry for justice
against the criminal, sexual offenders are often termed as monster, besters and sex
friends. By the society the especially wrath against the social harmony sexual offences
rape are inhuman acts. That the shake the root of the whole society, and the society
demands death penalty. The sexual offences are the most barbaric and brutal acts. Anoop
kumar has explained rape and murder in detail he gives example of the Supreme Court
case law surrender pal v/s state of Gujarat. The trial court found the accused was guilty of
the offence of rape. He was sentenced to death and it was confirmed by the high court.
But the Supreme Court converted the sentence of death to life imprisonment the ground
that the case did not belong to the rarest of the rare cases.

Srivastava S.& Srivastava P.K. (2011) have written in their article some countries
such as Britain and Germany are against the capital punishment they had abolished death
sentence but India and America have retained death sentence and impose suggestion
exceptional crime and special reasons. Death sentence is deprivation of one‟s life which
has been protected by article 21 of the constitution of India. The Supreme Court up held
the constitutionality of death penalty awarded in the rarest of the rare case and for special
reasons. Death penalty could be awarded only in white collar offenders anti social
offences and against the hardened criminals. Justice Bhagwati in Bachan Singh verses
State of Punjab held death penalty as unconstitutional and violating of article 14, 19, 21,
of the constitution of India. It is inhuman and cruel. Death penalty is arbitrary and there
is no legislative policy. Justice Bhagwati express his view it extend death penalty appears
from the point of Indian constitution as if it were against the death penalty and a violating
under article 14,19,21, of the constitution. Special reasons justifying death penalty and
the rarest of the rare types of cases are yet to totally and exactly defines approximations
give a special perspective as per the respectively of the concerned judges.

Arnim A. (2009) has written in his Human beings interrogate and appeal and
control deviance .The criminologists, jurists, sociologists and legal professionals have
various aspects about crime and penal systems but there is no solution to control the
crime has written history ,execution og death penalty constitutionality of death penalty
.He has written that there is a demand for abolition of death penalty .Nextly there is an
increased rhetoric for capital punishment for rape ,heinous crimes against women that
question that death penalty abolition or retention.

Rustam S. (2012). Has written in his article the Mahatma Gandhi is the thrust of
the reformative theory of punishment .One line “an eye for an eye will turn the whole
world blind” it was an old jungle law criminals as inhuman this theory is slowing the
nature of the modern society .Rustam Singh has written in his article „every saint has
past, every sinner has a future‟ VR. KRISHNA IYER J. when a man commits a crime
against society diabolical, coldblooded, pre planned murder of one innocent person. Such
person forfeits his rights to life A.P.sen.J.these two statements figure out that in Indian
judiciary regarding the imposition of punishment upon the convicts.

Suhas C. (2013) has written in his article Asian centre for human rights in short
(ACHR) he has written in his article Afzal Guru case the death row convicts .In the
prison manual by the home ministry the failure to inform the family members. According
of home government of India, total of 1455 convicts or an average of 132.27 convicts per
year were given death penalty during 2001to2011,Suhas Chakma gives (ACHR) on
average less than every third day one convict is awarded death penalty in India. He has
explained the state wise by table of the death penalty in 2001to2011.

Murlidhar S. (1998). Has written in his book constitutional validity of death

penalty .The law commission of Indian 1967 submits35th report to the government. It
justified conclusion for retention of death and has also referred to about Jagmohan case
law earlier .The death sentence extinguished all freedom guarantee U/A19 (1) (a) to (g)
unreasonable. The second judge awarded either of the tow punishments was not based
any legislative policy or standard or constituted an abolition thirdly judges it violative of
article 14 since tow person were found guilty of murdered and suggested they must be
treated different .The absence of procedure established by the law under which life could
be extinguished resulted in a violation of article 21.

Autrisaha & Pritika R. A. (2009) had written in book. The supreme court had
suggested well come steps in Indians jurisprudence the revisits the case Bachan singh
case has written death penalty as the rule and life sentence as the exception to the consent
of rarest of rare dictum in Santosh Bariayar case accused convicted U/S 302,364B, 120B,
of I.P.C Bariyar to death but two other hon‟ble judges declared the life imprisonment
.The High Court observes that bariyar was the main architect the court observed that .The
accused were not professional killers and they did not have any criminal history in the
view of the court nothing before them to show that reformed and rehabilited and hence
sentence him to rigorous life impresentment this judgment is a well come step in the
direction of abolition of death penalty .

Rajindar S. (2013). had written in his article. Dr. Ambedkar were opposed to
death penalty he has respectfully follow them Kasab was involved in the terror attack.
Two and expressed his desire to see his mother all this could be avoided before hanging.
The family member were not give opportunity to meet the accused. That there are so
many issues arising before the Indian government and judiciary is not taking any proper
procedure. The basic problem remains whether such a hardened criminal be hanged for
his cruelty against a country or he should be excused for his age and his religions
ambitions whatever.
 Shivam vij(2013). had written in his article. Death sentence does not serve beyond
doubt two third of the world to abolish death sentence Indian judges sentence death and
other have been life and still others are acquitted form death sentence is nothing but only
a legal lottery .Committee for protection of democratic right held in favour of abolition of
death penalty in India. That there is no specific rule and procedure to adopt in India, to
pronounce the death punishment. At times the conviction or the acquittal is a matter of
fate only.

Venkatesan V. (2011) had written about Ajit Singh Harnamsingh Gujral v/s State
of Maharashtra. The Supreme Court judgment says the most heinous and barbaric murder
invariably the rarest of rare case imposition of death. He had written in the case of
Bachan Singh that death sentence is an exception and the life imprisonment is the rule.
He refers to law commissions 35th report –Has surveyed hard data and said. We study
prisoner released from jail Supreme Court studies data of commission. The court power
wishes to abolish death penalty it has not so for good quality of the prisoners who are out
of prison after their respective punishments one may think in this article the parliament
has power but does not act while the death penalty court wishes to avoid death penalty
but has no power.

Jstice S .K. had written in his article. He has referred the case law Ramnaresh v/s
State of Chattisgarh relevant extract from the judgment the court provides certainty and a
greater clarity and also the special reason, and rarest of rare case the court keeps in mind
that it is being sufficiently punitive and purposefully preventive he refers to Bachan
Singh, Machi Singh, Naresh Giriv/s State of M.P.(2001)9 scc615) in this case crime is
heinously committed in spite of that death sentence is replaced by to life imprisonment.
One feels in this article that there are many case laws that define that death penalty‟s
conversion to life imprisonment is adopted because rarest of rare is not defined to
pronounce death penalty hence it option for life imprisonment.--- Jstice Swatanter
Kumar(2012).

Shantanu J. & Hirdesh S. (2013). Had written in article. Had raised the issue
whether the death penalty be abolished, whether Afzal Guru case is relevant other judicial
decisions, whether death penalty alternative punishment for murder u/s302 of
I.P.C.,wheather u/s 302 of I.P.C.against ethos of article 19as well as 14 constitution of
India these issue been tirelessly debated on national as well as international levels . He
had written that Indian jurisprudence is a blend of reformative and deterrent theories. He
had written that English had abolished death penalty , death penalty act 1965 and soviet
union death penalty was abolished in 1947. French penal code 1810 amended in 1959
retained death penalty. The death penalty is a part of Indian law. In the international view
the capital punishment should abolished there is no specific provision to define that
capital punishment should not be imposed.

Rajendar S. (2010) had written in his article and give some important expression
some thought by important personality Gandhiji who said “I do regard sentence as
contrar to Ahinsa. Only he takes it who gives it. Dr Ambedkar said “I think that having
regard to this fct the proper thing for this country to do it to abolish the death sentence
altogether “He had written in Canada death penalty was abolished in 1976 and in U.K.
1965 south Africa in 1995 A.P.J. Kalam said why all those ondeath raw were the poorest
of the poor. Remain well known only for the sake of official unacknowledged. One has to
think over the fact great philosophers and many countries are against death punishment.
From human point of view it should be abolished sooner or later.

Soutik B. (2012) had written in his article India allows death penalty in rarest of
rare crimes had written and explained Ajmal Qasabs attack on Mumbai and Bhartiya
Janta party (B.J.P.) demanded execution of death for him for his war against country
hence no mercy petition be allowed. The capital punishment says there is no evidence to
show that death penalty deters crime. According amnesty international impose death
sentence. It seems the countries against penalty are tow third of the whole world they
favour of death penalty it is against the humanity no one has right to take life for one is
able to give life to a dead person.

Chandrika P.S. (2004). She had written Benthan and Cesare Beccaria that
punishment is an evil in South Africa the first judgment in 1995 abolished death penalty
as brutal inhuman and degrading today 68 countries have abolished death penalty for all
crimes. Wheather the capital punishment has deterrent quality or not answer that capital
punishment should have maximum deterrent effect. The retention of capital punishment
is more effective than any other penalty. Question there is always a as for as attitude is
related it arises wheather the death penalty or retention we cannot be constantly adopted.

Rajindar S. (2012) had written. Most of the nations of the world abolished the
death penalty. The United nation passed a resolution on 20/11/2010 that all nation of on
death penalty if they do not agree to abolish death penalty. He had presented one case
Balwant singh rajoana. Who awarded death penalty for assassination of the Punjab chief
minister bent Singh in1995. The ultimate denial of human right, and it violates the rights
to life. The punishment of death will be life imprisonment. It is crystal clear that Justice
Rajendar Prasad catches the starting point to abolish the death penalty in India there are
so many cases but the government and parliament observed to abolish death punishment.

Yog M. C. (2013) had written in his article. Three social institutions the police
which gathers evidence machinery the court which adjudicates guilt and poses sentence
executive which thinks over mercy petition he had written in his article India is
notoriously corrupt, dishonest, criminalized police force and the evidence is presented in
the court by the police officer. The court considers evidence adjudicates or not he gives
examples of many cases. It appears the court can take cognizance to the point of view,
nature of the case but the some corrupted police officers never send correct reports.

Karthikeyan D.R. (2013) had written in his article. He had written question that
death penalty retention or abolition. Man lives the society to protect the deviant of the
society how for “eye for an eye”. “Tooth for tooth”. Emerged it is a jungle law. Innocent
person also found guilty and convicted for it is based on wrong evidence and
misconception of the circumstantial evidence. It seems that death penalty in India
retention or abolish many question arising whether death penalty retention or abolish.

Mr.Gajendra S. (2013) had written in his article “capital punishment for rape”.
Had written Hindu dharma talks of Narak for evil doors, Muslim talks of Jahannum and
Christianity of hell every religion talks of reforms the act of rape is most heinous crime
against human therefore the punishment should also be very painful. It seems that the
crime and it is physical assault on a women she has to face mental torture, too along with
physical injury. Indian court rules the „rarest of rare‟ cases the person who has committed
offence of rape must be led death.

Ahmad I.G. (2013) had written in his article capital punishment applied with
special reason brutal murder and the gravest offences against state. He had written
penological aspect deterrent theory, preventive theory, retributive theory, reformative
theory and rehabilitative theory .He had written Indian scenario define Mithu v/s state of
Punjab. The apex court declared that u/s 303 of I.P.C. is unconstitutional. It is not tune
article 14, 21, of constitution. He had given example of Jagmohan sing v/s state of U.P.
and Rajendra Prasad v/s state of U.P. It seems that society wants peace, security and
cleanliness for crime, there is no solution. The person was passed death penalty it is not
solution punishment of death penalty to control the crime.

Sapre ,& Karmarkar M.D. (2012) had written in their article Ajmal kasab,
sarobjeet singh and Afzal guru cases had written death penalty is commonly used in cases
of heinous crimes. Capital punishment awarded U/s 121,132,194,302,303,305, 396, of
I.P.C. they had define mode of execution in death question arise capital punishment
retention or abolition. Third person point of view India peace loving country of the world
our culture, traditional forget guilty and chance to give reform himself.

Suhrith P. (2013) Had written beccaria treatise publish treatise has two view
1)objectives of punishment states right to take life of a citizen opposed to the society
drive its sovereignty lord Macauly drafted the Indian penal code in 1860. The only reason
of murder was punishable with death rope was punishable mere imprisonment cannot be
placed on the same class of murder the law reverts to deterrrence and reformation for
justification. It seems that we change the law for rape or any crimes and awarded the
death sentence for the rapist.

Aknsha A. (2013) had written in his article many countries the thought is different
in Arabic countries they choose retributive punishment “eye fo an eye” other including
India restorative and reformist Indian award death penalty “rarest of rare cases” and
hardened criminals he had explained case law. Third person point of view death penalty
must be abolished in India.
 Raina S.M.N. (2012) had written abolition of death penalty had refer
Jagmohansing v/s state of Uttar Pradesh and Bachan Singh V/S State Of Punjab
observation of Krishna Iyer.j in Rajendra Prasad v/s state U.P. consider the social ethical
spiritual aspect of death penalty .Bhagwati .J. violation of article of 14and 21.It seems
that death penalty is violation of article 14and 21of Indian constitution 1950.

Ghatak .N.M. (2011) had written “mode of execution of death sentence and
incidental matters” he had written in his article 35th report of the law commission on
capital punishment 1967 and Royal commission on capital punishment 1949-1953 three
point are observed 1)less painful 2)quick 3) least mutilitation of the body. He had define
method of execution feet, throwing cliff , Boiling oil , Stoning till death , etc. In India the
method of execution is hanging by the rope.

Dave M. (2012) had written in his article “a key domino? Indonesia death penalty
politics”. Indonesia is at cross roads regarding death penalty whether to be abolish or not
Indonesia has carried out 22 death penalties since 1998 Indonesia confuses that capital
punishment with retention or abolish.

John L. (2013) had written in his book “does capital punishment deter murder”.
He writes capital punishment which does not conclude and contribute in lower rates
homicide. The number of countries abolish death penalty are Britain (1973) Canada
(1976)France(1981)Australia (1985) Italy (1994). It seems in India capital punishment
must be abolished and the government must follow the example of the developed
countries.

Jocelyn S. (2013) had written in his article” India gang rape sentencing death
penalty explained”. Had written two execution 2008 death penalty 1) Mohammad Ajmal
kasab Mumbai gun attack 2) 2013 Muhammad Afzal attacked Indian parliament had
written Asian centre for human right 2001 to 2011.,455 convicts sentenced to death 203
rape resulting to death in case of rapist on pregnant women, mentally retarded or
immature girls were sentenced to death.

Jayant S.& Bhavya N. (2012)had written in their article judicial review of

clemency power vis-à-vis capital punishment most heinous and barbarous activities are
common part in society where there are serious problems of youth. The capital
punishment penal provision should be granted in the rarest of the rare cases under article
72 article and article 161 constitution of India pardoning power of the president or
governor they had given number of examples like Mohammad Afzal case.who was
victim of both delay and at last being hanged to death.

Kannabiran K.G.(2012) had written in his book the death penalty was itself a
grave crime some countries had abolished death penalty in all crimes. India could not risk
to abolish death penalty because the maintaining social peace will be hard and there
would be problems of law and power. Unfortunately the younger generation for various
reasons has turned short tempered and less tolerant.