Supreme Court of India (File Photo)
Supreme Court of India (File Photo)

SC junks plea seeking to examine validity of law allowing hanging by neck

ANI | Updated: Mar 02, 2020 14:22 IST


New Delhi [India], Mar 2 (ANI): The Supreme Court on Monday refused to examine the validity of Section 354(5) of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) that provides for a death row convict to be "hanged by the neck till he is dead".
A bench of Chief Justice SA Bobde refused to entertain the plea challenging validity and legality of Section 354(5) CrPC and said its validity has already been upheld.
The petition filed by S Parameswaran Nampoothiri, an 88-year-old freedom fighter from Kerala, said that it's in conflict with the basic structure of the Constitution of India and sought directions to quash Section 354(5) CrPC, 1973.

The plea said that invoking Section 354(5) CrPC, which directs "he be hanged by the neck till he is dead", is in conflict with "the basic structure and features of the Constitution of India, its ideals, objectives, values, philosophies enshrined in the Constitution of India more particularly in the Fundamental Rights".
It said that it's also against the Preamble and also in the DNA of the Constitution of India, which lies in the "Objective Resolution" adopted on January 22, 1947, which are all about "life" only and freedom in various forms with dignity with fundamental duties and there is not even a subtle reference about "death" in any form in the Constitution of India.
The plea asked whether imposing "death" as a sentence on any person is ultra vires to the Constitution and an alien to the Indian constitutional philosophy and morality and if so, it is liable to be quashed.
The plea said that the news of death penalty had disturbed the petitioner and on further study and analysis, the petitioner has found that the penalty is not Indian and it's a continuation of the colonial system and is against the letter and spirit of the Constitution of India.
Almost all democratic countries stopped the death penalty, which India is still following, the petitioner contended. It questioned sentencing a person to death "when the state cannot create a person or give life to a dead person". (ANI)

Loading...
iocl
iocl