Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Case Summary - Bachan Singh vs. State of Punjab
Case Summary - Bachan Singh vs. State of Punjab
Home About Us News Lex Pedia Lex Bulletin YouTube News Work With Us Contribute
YOU ARE AT: Home » Case Summary » Case Summary: Bachan Singh vs. State of Punjab
Case Summary: Bachan Singh vs. State of Punjab 0 TOP LAW COLLEGES
Judges: Justice Y.C. Chandrachud; Justice A. Gupta; Justice N. Untwalia; Justice P.N Bhagwati and Justice R.
Sarkaria.
INTRODUCTION:-
This Case is a landmark judgment given by 5 judges Bench of the Hon’ble Supreme Court. In this case Supreme Look Flawless @ 15%
Court announced important limitations on the death penalty by setting the “rarest of the rare” doctrine. The Off
Supreme Court said,” A real and abiding concern for the dignity of human life postulates resistance to taking a life
Mamaearth skincare Free of Parabens,
through law’s instrumentality. That ought not to be done except in rarest or the rare cases where the alternative
SLS & safe on all skin types now at 15%
opinion is unquestionably foreclosed”. Off | MAMA15
Mamaea h
FACTS:
Shop Now
The Appellant Bachan Singh was convicted for his wife’s murder and was sentenced for life imprisonment. After
undergoing the term of imprisonment ( i.e after his release) he was living with his cousin Hukam Singh and his
family by this hukam singh’s wife and his son objected the appellant’s living in their house. A few days prior to
this occurrence in the midnight Vidya Bai was awakened by alarm and saw the appellant inflicting axe blow on CATEGORIES
her sister’s ( Beeran Bai) face. On the attempt to stop the appellant Vidya Bai got blown on her face and ear with
axe leading injuries her face and ear making her unconscious. Diwan singh who was sleeping at a distance woke Select Category
up by the shriek and raised an alarm to wake Gulab singh sleeping at a distance from there. On seeing an
appellant with axe on Desa bai’s face they both hurried to stop him. Noticing them moving towards him the
appellant left the axe and ran away. Diwan Singh and Gulab Singh gave a chase to him but couldn’t apprehend
RECENT POSTS
him. Later Bachan Singh was tried and convicted and sentenced to death under Section 302, Indian Penal Code
for the murders of Desa Singh, Durga Bai and Veeran Bai by the sessions judge. The High Court confirmed his
Probation: A Reformative Theory (Bangladesh
death sentence given by the sessions judge and dismissed his appeal. Bachan Singh then appealed to the Supreme
Perspetive)
Court by Special Leave, the Question raised in the appeal was, whether the facts of his case were “special reasons”
Case Summary: Haynes vs Harwood 1936
for awarding him the death sentence as required in section 354(3) of CrPC, 1973.
Case Summary: Vennangot Anuradha Samir vs.
Vennangot Mohandas Samir 2015
ISSUES:
Whether death penalty provided for the offence of murder in Section 302, Indian Penal Code, 1860 is “All India Online Debate Competition 2.0” by IMS
unconstitutional? Noida Nayi Pehal Society
Whether the Facts found by the lower Courts would be considered “special reason” for awarding the death Student Conclave- Billionaire @21 with Multilevel
penalty as is required under Section 354(3) CRPC? Marketing
JUDGEMENT:
The Supreme Court lucidly dismissed the challenges pertaining to the constitutionality of Sec 302 of IPC and
354(3) of CRPC. Court further said that the six fundamental rights guaranteed Under 19(1) are not absolute
rights. These rights are subjected to inherent restrained stemming from the reciprocal obligation of one member
of a civil society to so use his rights as not to infringe or injure similar rights of another( sic uteri tuo ut alienum
non laedas). Also it was made very clear by the court that article 19 clause (2) to (6) has expressly made subject to
the power of the state to impose reasonable restriction on the exercise of rights of citizen. There are several other
indications, also, in the constitution which show that the constitution make fully cognizant of the existence of
death penalty for murder and certain other offences in the IPC 1860.
The expression “Special reason” in section 354(3) of CRPC means exceptional reasons “ founded n the
exceptionally grave circumstances the death penalty or an alternative imprisonment for life is awarded. The apex
court laid down the principle of “rarest of the rare cases” in awarding the death penalty. Those convicted for
murder, life imprisonment is the rule and death sentence is an exception.
HELD:
The Supreme Court by a majority of 4:1 reaffirmed its earlier decision and held that the provision of death
penalty as an alternative punishment for murder under section 302 insofar it is neither unreasonable nor it is
against the public interest. It violates neither the letter nor the ethos of Article 19 of the constitution of India. It is
constitutionally valid. Exercise of discretion under sec 354(3) of CRPC, 1973 should be exceptional and grave
circumstances and imposition of death sentence should only be in rarest of rare cases.
National discussion about the death penalty has resurfaced from time to time. The Supreme Court addressed the
question of constitutionality of the death penalty for the first time in Jagmohan Singh v State of Uttar
Pradesh[1] “The death sentenced does not extinguish all the freedoms guaranteed under Article 19(1) and it
was also held that it was not violative of Art 14 of the constitutional on the ground that
Shop Now
Mamaea h Shop Now
unguarded and uncontrolled discretion is given to judges to impose either capital punishment or imprisonment SUBSCRIBE TO OUR
for life. Thus the death penalty became the exception rather than the rule” However, the Bachan Singh’s case
NEWSLETTER
decision did not elaborate the criteria for identifying “rarest of rare” cases. The Bachan singh case also does Subscribe to our mailing list and get interesting
not explain as to what falls under the purview of “rarest of rare case”. stories handpicked for you.
[3]https://indiankanoon.org/doc/1201493/
BACHAN SINGH V STATE OF PUNJAB CASE ANALYSIS CASE SUMMARY CONSTITUTION OF INDIA
DEATH PENALTY FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS JAGMOHAN SINGH VS STATE OF UP SECTION 302 IPC
Case Summary: Pakala Narayan Swami vs. Admissions Open for One Year LL.M.
Emperor (1939) (Professional) @ NLU Mumbai; Apply by 15
July
ALSO ON LAWLEX
6 years ago • 2 comments 4 years ago • 1 comment 5 years ago • 1 comment 3 years ago •
In this era when the internet About Us Saksharta For your kind reference, More than
is ‘mobile’ and Sadvidya Educational and short details of the program gave Comm
‘pocket’(though slow) … Social Society, a … are as follows: About the … Admission
Sponsored
She sticks a rose stalk into a potato and look what happens a week later!
Tips and Tricks
These Are The Most Daring Dresses Ever Worn At The ACM Awards
Crafthought
Man Orders Pizza Every Day for 10 Years Until Employees Realize…
Sizzlfy
[Pics] The Real Person Behind Jack From The Titanic Had A More Bitter End
LOG IN WITH
OR SIGN UP WITH DISQUS ?
Name
Terms & Conditions · Privacy Policy · Our Team · Work With Us · Support Us · Join CAP · Internships · Advert
Copyright © 2021 All Rights Reserved. For collaborations contact mail.lawlex@gmail.com