Editorial: A matter of life and death

The Special Court in Gujarat has set a record of sorts by sentencing 38 people to death, the first time in Independent India that so many convicts have been awarded capital punishment in a single ruling. While there is no judicial limit whatsoever on the number of people who may be sentenced to death, the judgment is likely to be submitted to intense scrutiny. The verdict, which sentenced another 11 to life imprisonment, was delivered against those, many of who were members of the banned Student Islamic Movement of India (SIMI), who were found guilty of a series of 21 blasts that ripped through Ahmedabad 14 years ago.

That those who committed the carnage were a part of a terrorist criminal conspiracy is not in doubt. But the judgment, when it comes up for judicial review, is likely to be closely examined for, among other things, the sentences it dispensed. The Supreme Court has made it more than clear, and more than once, that capital punishment should be awarded only in the “rarest of the rare” cases. Established in the Bachan Singh vs State of Punjab case, it laid down that the normal punishment for grievous crimes such as murder is life imprisonment. While the principle that ‘life imprisonment is the rule and death penalty is the exception’ is now well established, the judiciary has not clearly defined what “rarest of the rare” means, leaving it open to the interpretation of individual judges. The Court has spelt out criteria for what could constitute “rarest of the rare”, but these are of a very general nature.

While it is understood that terrorist crimes that cause great loss of lives and livelihoods are much more likely to attract the death penalty, it is important to tread cautiously when dealing with conspiracies involving large numbers of people. In the Rajiv Gandhi assassination case, the single judge sentenced all the 26 accused to death. The sentencing made no distinction between those who were directly responsible for planning and executing the former Prime Minister’s death and others whose role was arguably more tangential – for instance, for helping the accused to escape the police dragnet. Many of these people were connected only by actions that transpired after Rajiv Gandhi was killed.

Eventually, the Supreme Court confirmed the death sentence on only four people (one was later commuted). What needs to be examined in the Gujarat judgments, which runs over 7,000 pages is whether an adequate distinction has been made regarding the various roles played by the conspirators. The judge has identified 31 of those found guilty as “key conspirators” and the remaining seven as “active conspirators”, arguing that only the “ultimate punishment” will ensure the country’s safety and security. While it is inappropriate to speculate on whether the sentences will be upheld, it must be welcomed that there are judicial checks and balances when it comes to awarding the death penalty – a form of punishment that has already been scrapped in a large number of countries.