Death penalty not inhuman – Supreme Court of India

1942

It is said that common sense is not always common. This becomes obvious when the so-called human right activists demand abolition of death penalty. The logic they use to condemn death penalties even for terrorists and mass murderers cannot possibly stand in any court. Politicizing issues and attempts to get some limelight by raising objections is part of the game but to seriously say that death penalty should cease to exist is a proof of lack of common sense.

As expected, on Friday the Supreme Court of India said that capital punishment is not inhuman nor barbaric, and does not violate the right of life and liberty in heinous crimes.

File photo: Supreme court of India at New Delhi
(File photo: Supreme court of India at New Delhi)

Let us not forget that Indian constitution has its roots in the Vedic scriptures. According to Vedic teachings, when a murderer is served death penalty, it neutralizes his sin and if he somehow or other escapes it, he is forced to suffer even more punishment in his future births.

On the other hand, death penalties must not be used indiscriminately or for satisfying personal agendas as such judgement is considered adharmic and is against India’s constitution.

¬†The bench of Justices TS Thakur, RK Agrawal and AK Goel said, “A sentence of death in a case of murder may be rare, but if the courts have found it is the only sentence that can be awarded, it is difficult to revisit that question…”

What was important, the top court said, was that the punishment should be should be proportionate to the crime.’

“Death penalty in a case of kidnapping or abduction will not qualify to be described as barbaric or inhuman so as to infringe the right to life guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution,” the court said.
Source Death Penalty for Heinous Crime Not Barbaric, Says Supreme Court