#death penalty

The Punjab and Haryana High Court held that a Section 27 statement is admissible only if it directly leads to the discovery of a new fact and is clearly linked to that fact. Applying this, the court excluded such statements in a murder-rape case, quashing death sentences and acquitting the accused, thereby tightening evidentiary standards.

The Supreme Court dismissed a PIL challenging hanging as the sole mode of execution, reaffirming the Constitution Bench ruling in Deena v. Union of India (1983) that Section 354(5) CrPC (now Section 393(5) BNSS) does not violate Article 21. The Court held that absent empirical evidence of botched executions or proven superiority of lethal injection, the legislative choice of execution method stands.

The Punjab & Haryana HC reduced the death penalty for the rape-murder of a 7-year-old to life imprisonment with a mandatory fifty-year minimum and imposed fines of Rs 50 lakh and Rs 23 lakh. It also ruled that CCTV footage without a Section 65B certificate is inadmissible, raising evidentiary standards in grave sexual-offence cases.

Rajasthan High Court commuted a death sentence to life imprisonment in a brutal axe murder case, applying the rarest of rare doctrine. The ruling underscores the court's rigorous balancing of aggravating and mitigating factors under sentencing jurisprudence.

Karnataka HC overturns death sentence in a POCSO case, ruling that life imprisonment without remission suffices unless extreme brutality or exceptional depravity is proven. The court merged overlapping POCSO convictions and enhanced victim compensation to ₹5 lakh, reinforcing sentencing proportionality under the 'rarest of rare' doctrine.

The Calcutta High Court commuted death sentences to life imprisonment in a POCSO murder case, ruling that the absence of Section 65B certification for digital evidence and inconclusive forensic findings fatally undermined the 'rarest of rare' threshold. This sets a critical precedent: even in heinous child sexual offenses, procedural and evidentiary lapses in electronic and scientific proof can override aggravating circumstances in capital sentencing.

Bombay High Court sets aside a death sentence after finding gross violations of the accused's right to legal aid under Article 21, emphasizing that fair trial guarantees are non-negotiable in capital punishment cases. The ruling mandates a fresh trial, reinforcing that procedural lapses cannot compromise constitutional rights, especially where liberty or life is at stake.

Calcutta High Court overturned a death sentence, ruling that failure to record 'special reasons' under Section 354(3) CrPC and disregard for mitigating factors render the sentence unconstitutional. The judgment underscores that reliance on uncorroborated, politically aligned testimony violates evidentiary standards and due process, setting a precedent for stricter judicial scrutiny in capital punishment cases.