A ray of hope for death penalty reform emerged from the Supreme Court today, as it reserved verdict on a long-pending plea to replace hanging with less agonizing alternatives. The hearing exposed deep divides on balancing retribution with humanity.
Petitioner Rishi Malhotra, a seasoned advocate, has since 2017 campaigned against hanging’s brutality, describing botched executions where victims suffer prolonged asphyxia. He pitched lethal injection as a modern, ethical substitute, proven to minimize suffering through precise chemical administration.
The plea innovatively seeks convict choice—hanging or injection—framing it as a dignity imperative under constitutional mandates.
In response, the Attorney General disclosed a government panel deliberating alternatives yet affirmed hanging’s legal primacy and operational security under BNSS provisions.
Challenging this inertia, the apex court bench critiqued the stance, affirming the Constitution’s dynamism. ‘Our fundamental rights encompass a respectful demise,’ they asserted, signaling judicial intent to drag penal practices into the 21st century.
With directives for supplemental notes in three weeks, the case’s outcome could dismantle hanging’s exclusivity, mirroring global trends. Legal circles watch closely, as this may redefine India’s stance on the ultimate penalty, fostering a more compassionate jurisprudence.