NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Wednesday observed that "the government (Union) is not ready to evolve", after being apprised by the Centre's opposition to a suggestion that death row convicts be given an option to choose lethal injection as a mode of execution.
"Problem is, the government is not ready to evolve...it's (death by hanging) a very old procedure, things have changed over a period of time," observed a two-judge bench of the apex court, headed by Justice Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta.
The court was hearing a plea filed by lawyer Rishi Malhotra, seeking the removal of the present mode of execution of death row convicts by hanging from the statute. He also sought that the top court should direct the government to adopt the use of lethal injection in place of hanging as a mode of execution in death penalty cases.
He informed the Court that 49 out of 50 states in the USA have adopted the same. "At least give an option to the condemned prisoner whether he wants hanging or lethal injection. The lethal injection is quick, humane and decent, as opposed to hanging, which is cruel, barbaric and lingering...for 40 minutes, the body lingers on the rope," Malhotra argued.
During the course of the hearing on Wednesday, senior advocate Sonia Mathur, for the Union, argued that ultimately the issue raised involves a policy decision. "It may not be very feasible to give the option to death row convicts to choose lethal injection as a mode of execution," she pointed out.
After hearing Mathur's submissions, the court posted the matter for further hearing to November 11.
Malhotra, in his PIL, sought to abolish the present practice of executing a death row convict by hanging which involves "prolonged pain and suffering". He sought that the mode of execution be replaced with intravenous lethal injection, shooting, electrocution or gas chamber in which a convict could die in just a matter of minutes.
The Central government had, in its counter affidavit, filed last year, submitted to the Supreme Court that hanging is far safer and quicker than lethal injection or firing squad in connection with a petition filed by a lawyer, seeking alternative way of execution other than hanging.
The Union had further stated that hanging as a mode of execution is easy to assemble. "It (Hanging) is quick and simple and free from anything that would unnecessarily sharpen the poignancy of the prisoner's apprehension. It is quick and certain means to execute death penalty by hanging. Hanging eliminates the possibility of a lingering death," the Union of India in its counter affidavit stated.
Malhotra in his plea sought directions to declare provisions contained under Section 354(5) CrPC (Code of Criminal Procedure), as hung by the neck till the person is dead, as ultra vires of the Constitution for being discriminatory and violative of Article 21 of the Constitution.
"Declare right to die by a dignified procedure of death as a fundamental right (defined under Article 21 of the Constitution of India)," he said in his PIL.
The petitioner argued before the apex court that execution by hanging is also against the resolutions adopted by the United Nations Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC) that had categorically resolved that "where Capital punishment occurs, it shall be carried out so as to inflict minimum possible suffering".
