Bachan Singh v State of Punjab
🔷 Case Name: Bachan Singh v. State of Punjab
📌 Citation: AIR 1980 SC 898; (1980) 2 SCC 684
📌 Bench: 5-Judge Constitution Bench
📌 Date of Judgment: 9 May 1980
🔷 1. Background of the Case
Bachan Singh was convicted of murder and sentenced to life imprisonment.
After being released, he murdered his cousin and was again tried under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.
The trial court sentenced him to death, which was confirmed by the High Court.
Bachan Singh appealed to the Supreme Court, challenging the constitutional validity of the death penalty provided under Section 302 IPC and its application.
🔷 2. Legal Questions Involved
The case raised two major constitutional and legal issues:
Is the death penalty unconstitutional, being violative of Article 14, 19, and 21 of the Indian Constitution?
If not unconstitutional, under what circumstances should the death penalty be imposed?
🔷 3. Arguments of the Appellant (Bachan Singh)
Death penalty is arbitrary and violative of Article 14 (equality), Article 19 (freedom), and Article 21 (life and liberty).
Section 302 IPC does not lay down clear guidelines as to when death should be imposed, leading to judicial arbitrariness.
Life imprisonment should be the maximum punishment, and death should be abolished in a civilized society.
🔷 4. Arguments of the State (Respondent)
The Constitution itself recognizes the death penalty (e.g., in Article 72 and 161 — pardoning powers).
Section 302 IPC gives discretion to judges, not arbitrariness.
Death penalty serves as a deterrent, especially for heinous crimes.
🔷 5. Judgment of the Supreme Court (Majority 4:1)
The majority upheld the constitutional validity of the death penalty under Section 302 IPC.
🔹 Key Observations:
✅ 1. Death Penalty is Constitutionally Valid
The Court held that Section 302 IPC does not violate Articles 14, 19, or 21.
The right to life under Article 21 is not absolute and can be deprived by a just, fair, and reasonable procedure.
✅ 2. Balance Between Life Imprisonment and Death Penalty
The Court emphasized that life imprisonment is the rule, and death penalty is the exception.
The sentence of death should be imposed only in the "rarest of rare cases", where life imprisonment is clearly inadequate.
🔷 6. The “Rarest of Rare” Doctrine
This doctrine was first laid down in this case, providing a guiding principle to the judiciary for awarding the death sentence.
🔹 Criteria for Death Penalty:
Aggravating Circumstances:
When the murder is extremely brutal, grotesque, diabolical, revolting, or shocking to society’s conscience.
Mitigating Circumstances:
Includes age, background, lack of prior criminal history, possibility of reform, etc.
Test of Balance:
If life imprisonment is sufficient and there is a possibility of reform, the death penalty should not be imposed.
Individualized Sentencing:
Sentencing must consider both the crime and the criminal, not just the brutality of the act.
🔷 7. Dissenting Opinion – Justice Bhagwati
Justice P.N. Bhagwati dissented, stating:
The death penalty is inhuman and degrading, violating Article 21.
It is arbitrary and often influenced by judicial subjectivity, class bias, and lack of guidelines.
He called for its abolition.
🔷 8. Impact of the Judgment
The case remains the cornerstone of Indian death penalty jurisprudence.
It did not abolish the death penalty but severely restricted its use.
Subsequent judgments (e.g., Machhi Singh v. State of Punjab, Santosh Bariyar v. State of Maharashtra) refined the application of the rarest of rare doctrine.
Made the process of awarding the death penalty more transparent and accountable.
🔷 9. Summary Table
| Aspect | Details |
|---|---|
| Case Name | Bachan Singh v. State of Punjab |
| Citation | AIR 1980 SC 898; (1980) 2 SCC 684 |
| Bench Strength | 5-Judge Constitution Bench |
| Majority Opinion | Death penalty is valid under Article 21 |
| Dissenting Judge | Justice P.N. Bhagwati |
| Doctrine Laid Down | "Rarest of Rare" cases doctrine |
| Guidance Given | Consider both aggravating and mitigating factors |
| Impact | Restricted use of death penalty to exceptional cases |
🔷 10. Conclusion
Bachan Singh v. State of Punjab (1980) is a milestone judgment in the history of Indian criminal law. It upheld the constitutional validity of the death penalty but ensured that it could only be imposed in the "rarest of rare" cases. This case introduced the concept of individualized sentencing, encouraging courts to examine the criminal as well as the crime before deciding on capital punishment. While the death penalty remains on the statute books, Bachan Singh ensures it is used with utmost caution, maintaining a delicate balance between societal interests and human dignity.
RELATED Blog
0 comments