Are the trial courts too liberal with death sentence?
Are the trial courts too liberal with death sentence?
Introduction
According to the Amnesty International's Death Penalty report of 2015, India is one of the seven countries that had executed people in 2013. But, no executions were carried out in the year of 2014.
About 607 people were executed worldwide in 2014. Iran, Iraq and Saudi Arabia were responsible for the 72% of the recorded executions. Around 270 people in India are currently on the death row.
Recently, the Supreme court rejected the mercy plea of Yakub Memon who was awarded the death sentence by a TADA court in 2006.
A lot of protests are also being carried out by members of various Tamil organizations regarding the death sentence given to three convicts in Rajiv Gandhi assassination case.
With an increase in the number of death sentences being awarded, do you think the trial courts are too liberal with the concept of death sentence? Let's take a look.
Yes – Trial courts are liberal with death sentences.
2014 execution – India did not carry out any executions in 2014. There was a 22% decrease in executions in 2014, when compared to 2013.
Considering the crime – The trial courts award the death sentence to people who have committed a major crime. The death sentence given to Yakub Memon is one of the best example, wherein the court has considered the intensity of a crime.
Fair role – The trial courts play a fair role while dealing with the death sentences. They transfer the case to the Supreme Court, in situations, wherein the case appears to be confusing. In such cases, they do not immediately announce a death sentence, no matter how serious the crime is.
No impact - There are very few death sentences that have been confirmed by the trial courts and even the Supreme court. The death sentences do not give out a stronger message and they considered to be of no use. Thus, the trial courts are liberal with the death sentences.
No – Trial courts are not liberal with the death sentences.
Numbers speak – The rising numbers of the death sentences portrays that the trial courts are not liberal with the death sentences. Out of 1790 death sentences, just 5% of the death sentences were awarded by the trial courts and was later on, accepted by the Supreme court.
No analysis – Around 385 death row inmates were interviewed under the Death Penalty Project. It stated that most of the people who were awarded the death sentence by the trial courts were poor. 25% of the death sentences were awarded to people who have committed a single murder.
Proximity – The trial courts face a closer proximity to the crime than the Supreme courts, in terms of occurrence and distance. Thus, they should not be liberal while dealing with death sentences.
Conclusion
With the rejection of Yakub Memon's plea by the Supreme Court, a huge question has arisen on whether the trial courts are tough or liberal with the death sentences.
But over all, we see hat trial courts are liberal with the death sentences as they award the death sentence to people who have committed a serious crime.
Discussion
- RE: Are the trial courts too liberal with death sentence? -Deepa Kaushik (07/24/15)
- We are living a situation where we fiught brutal offence on daily basis. Law and order could hardly be visualised across the country. Females are most insure species wandering around in our beloved nation. And justice has lost its essence in the lure of corruption and fear for life. And in these circumstances, we stand here to debate and discuss the topic that trial courts are liberal in announcing death sentence.
Is it all done when the trial court announces its judgement? The answer is a 'Big No'. People committing serious and heinious crimes mostly have enough support to carry their fight further to the apex i.e to the Supreme Court. And our kind-hearted law mostly leaves the culprit with someor the other punishment sparing the death sentence. Even if Supreme Court awards death sentence which comes many decades after the offence and the culprit has enjoyed his life in pleasure, still we give the scope for mercy petition to the accused. And this chain doesn't halt here. In case this plea is rejected, even then we do care to feed the brutal offender for many more months before hanging him / her. Where does all this money comes from? Isn't that the tax payers' money? So, indirectly we are giving a luxurious life to those who have made our lives most insecure and made us feel like living on thorns.
Why at all we have trial courts when its judgement hardly carries any importance. And when the death sentence awarded by the trial courts carry no importance in the judicial book, it would be better to cancel the authorisation of awarding death sentence by these trial courts. it is nothing but wastage of time and money and making the near and dear ones of the victims to die day-by-day physical after the emotional agony and mental torture they have gone through.
Precisely, this topic holds no importance unless and until we give due importance to the judgements by the trial courts in regard to the death sentence. Number of pending cases, innocent people running from pillar to post for justice, criminals wandering freely in outer world, and those within prison enjoying their life even after been awarded with death sentence. This topic would hold meaning only when we can rectify all these concerns from our judicial system and give a sound punishment to the accused immediately for their offense.
