SRINIVAS UNIVERSITY

SRINIVAS INSTITUTE OF ALLIED HEALTH SCIENCE

MUKKA, MANGALORE
SUBMITTED BY
2019-2022 BATCH
POOJA S GOVEKAR
POORVI S KUMAR
RAMSHIYA TT
RITHUVARNA C
SCHUMACHER
SHISHIRA
SHRAVYA S RAI
DEPARTMENT OF FORENSIC SCIENCE AND CRIMINOLOGY
INSTITUTE OF ALLIED HEALTH SCIENCE
SRINIVAS UNIVERSITY
MUKKA, MANGALORE
SEPTEMBER 2022
SUBMITTED BY
2019-2022 BATCH 6 TH SEMESTER
 ANALYSIS ON DEATH PENALTY: PUBLIC OPINION IN DK
DISTRICT KARNATAKA

PROJECT SUBMITTED TO DEPARTMENT OF FORENSIC SCIENCE

AND CRIMINOLOGY IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE
REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF BACHELOR’S OF
SCIENCE
IN
FORENSIC SCIENCE

PROJECT GUIDE COURSE COORDINATOR

Mrs. LAVANYA Mrs. SWATHI. D. SHETTY
DEAN
Mr. DEVASEELAN.S

SRINIVAS INSTITUTE OF ALLIED HEALTH SCIENCE ,

SRINIVAS UNIVERSITY, MUKKA
MANGALORE-574146
 DECLARATION

We, hereby declare that the project entitled “Analysis on death penalty: public opinion
in dk district” submitted to the Department of Forensic Science and Criminology,
Srinivas Institute of Allied Health Science, Mukka in partial fulfilment of the requirement
for the degree of B.Sc. in Forensic Science and Criminology is our original work under
the supervision and guidance of Mrs. Lavanya, Professor, Department of Forensic
Science and Criminology has not formed the basis for the award of any degree,
associateship or fellowship under any university.
 CERTIFICATE

This is to certify that the project entitled “ANALYSIS ON DEATH PENALTY: PUBLIC
OPINION IN DK DISTRICT” is the Bonafede work carried out by GROUP -5 students
of B.Sc. Forensic Science &Criminology, Srinivas Institute of Allied Health Sciences
Mukka during the year2021-2022 in partial fulfilment for the award of the Degree of
Bachelor of Sciences (Forensic Science and Criminology) of the students. This research
has been carried out under the guidance and supervision of our institute faculty Mrs.
Lavanya, Professor, Department of Forensic Science and Criminology, Srinivas
University Mukka, Mangalore, and that the major research has not formed the basis for
the award previously of any degree, diploma, associate ship, fellowship or any other
similar title.

APPROVED

Place: Mangalore Mr. Devaseelan.S

Date: September 2022 Dean

Srinivas Institute of Allied

Health Sciences
 CERTIFICATE

This is to certify that the project entitled “ANALYSIS ON DEATH PENALTY:

PUBLIC OPINION IN DK DISTRICT” has been carried out by the students
of GROUP – 5, third year students of Bachelor of Science in Forensic Science
and Criminology, Srinivas Institute of Allied Health Sciences, Mukka under our
guidance and supervision and this research has not been submitted previously for
the award of any degree, diploma, associate ship, fellowship or any other similar
title in any university.

Place: Mangalore Project Guide

Date: September 2022 Mrs. Lavanya

Assistant Professor

Forensic Science and criminology

 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

First and foremost, we are thankful to Srinivas University for providing us opportunity
to do this research work. We are grateful to our Dean Mr. Devaseelan for all his support
throughout the research and grateful to our research guides Mrs. Lavanya and Mr. Sahil,
Assistant Professor Srinivas University for guiding and helping us to do this research.

A very special word of thanks is offered to Mrs. Swathi, Professor of Forensic Department
Srinivas University for sharing her valuable opinion and information for our research.

We are also indebted to fellow students and our friends who shared their thoughts.

Above all we give thanks and praise to God Almighty who has endowed us with wisdom
and whose strength and guidance alone have enable us to complete this work.
 ABSTRACT

Society’s perspectives on using the death penalty as a means of punishment significantly

impact the decisions of lawmakers, politicians who use it as a platform for election, and the
criminals who devote the crime of homicides.

This study included 15 different questions related to various aspects of death

penalty. Data recently collected have revealed variance in levels of support for the death
penalty, among people of DK district. 82 percent Death express more degree of support and 18
percent express some degree of opposition. Participants were given with a choice between the
death penalty, life imprisonment without the possibility of parole and prison term of their
choice. 58 percent supported death penalty, 32 percent supported life imprisonment without
parole and 10 percent supported prison term of their choice. Statistical analysis was made based
on various objectives such as age, sex, employment status, educational status, and the area
where they live. According to a multivariate Analysis people between the age group 30 to 40,
females, employed, people with education status of minimum degree, and people living in
urban area support death penalty.
LIST OF CONTENTS

Sl.no Particulars Page no

CHAPTER 1 Introduction 1

CHAPTER 2 Review of literature 11

CHAPTER 3 Methodology 20

CHAPTER 4 Data analysis 23

CHAPTER 5 Conclusion 38

CHAPTER 6 Results and discussion 40

CHAPTER 7 Reference 43
LIST OF TABLES AND CHARTS

Sl.no Particulars Page no.

TABLE 1 Offences in which capital 6
punishment may be awarded
TABLE 2 List of capital punishments 10
executed
TABLE 3 Characteristics of respondents 25

TABLE 4 Participants who support or oppose 27

death penalty
TABLE 5 Percentage of participants who 28
support or oppose death penalty
based on gender
TABLE 5.1 Percentage of support on death 28
penalty based on gender
TABLE 6 Percentage of participants who 30
support or oppose death penalty
based on age
TABLE 6.1 Percentage of support on death 30
penalty based on age
TABLE 7 Percentage of participants who 32
support or oppose death penalty
based on employment status
TABLE 7.1 Percentage of support on death 32
penalty based on employment
status
TABLE 8 Percentage of participants who 34
support or oppose death penalty
based on educational status
TABLE 8.1 Percentage of support on death 34
penalty based on educational status
TABLE 9 Percentage of participants who 36
support or oppose death penalty
based on the area where they live
TABLE 9.1 Percentage of support on death 36
penalty based on the area where
they live
CHART 1 Percentage of people who support 27
death penalty
CHART 2 Percentage of participants who 29
support death penalty based on
gender
CHART 3 Percentage of participants who 31
support death penalty based on age
CHART 4 Percentage of participants who 33
support death penalty based on
employment status
CHART 5 Percentage of participants who 35
support death penalty based on
educational status
CHART 6 Percentage of participants who 37
support death penalty based on the
area where they live
 CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCTION

1
 INTRODUCTION

DEATH PENALTY
Penalty or capital punishment is the highest degree of punishment that can be awarded to an
individual under any penal law in force in any part of the world. Capital punishment is the legal
procedure of the state in which it exercises its power to take an individual’s life. (Buchan Singh
vs.2017.Death penalty in India)

The use of the death penalty is not consistent with the right to life and the right to live free from
torture or cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment. There is growing consensus
for universal abolition of the death penalty. Some 170 States have abolished or introduced a
moratorium on the death penalty either in law or in practice. Despite this abolitionist trend, the
death penalty is still employed in small number of countries, largely because of the myth that
it deters crime. A few states also still permit use of the death penalty for crimes other than those
of extreme gravity involving intentional killing, including for drug-related crimes or terrorism
charges More work needs to be done. Worldwide abolition is necessary for the enhancement
of human dignity and progressive development of human rights.

The death penalty is the most controversial penal practice in the modern world. Other harsh,
physical forms of criminal punishment – referred to as corporal punishment – have generally
been eliminated in modern times as uncivilized and unnecessary. In most countries,
contemporary methods of punishment – such as imprisonment or fines – no longer involve the
infliction of physical pain (see Corporal Punishment). Although imprisonment and fines are
universally recognized as necessary to the control of crime, the nations of the world are split
on the issue of capital punishment. About 90 nations have abolished the death penalty and an
almost equal number of nations (most of which are developing countries) retain.

Supporters of the death penalty believe that those who commit murder, because they have taken
the life of another, have forfeited their own right to life. Furthermore, they believe, capital
punishment is a just form of retribution, expr and reinforcing the moral indignation not only of
the victim’s relatives but of law-abiding citizens in general. The death penalty isn't being used
interchangeable terms. While the campaign to eliminate the death penalty has been resisted in
many countries, some countries further expanded its scope. The manufacture and ownership to

2
sell such drugs was declared a criminal offense by more than 30 nations. The nation imposes
automatic death sentences for possessing comparatively small quantities of illicit substance.
Iran, Singapore, Indonesia and the Philippines. Around three-Fourths of persons executed in
2000 have been convicted of drug offenses in Singapore,

which is also the highest per capita execution frequency in any region. About twenty countries
have set death sentences on similar financial crimes including fraud and corruption by officials,
abuse of public funds, theft of huge amounts of money and money and monetary policy. In
around two dozen countries, more so than most Muslim states, sexual crimes of all kinds were
indeed punishable by imprisonment. Or more 50 capital offenses took place in language in the
early 21st century. For several years about 30 nations carry out executions, given the vast
number of capital crimes in some nations.

DEATH PENALTY IN INDIA

As per the current position of law in India the death penalty is awarded in only 'Rarest of the
rare cases' and primary mode of execution as given under section 354(5) of the criminal code
of procedure, 1973 is hanging by neck till death.

Death penalty or capital punishment is the highest degree of punishment that can be awarded
to an individual under any penal law in force in any part of the world. Capital punishment is
the legal procedure of the state in which it exercises its power to take an individual’s life.
(Buchan Singh vs.2017.Death penalty in India.)

In India, the death penalty remains formal. India offers the death penalty for serious crimes.
Article 21 of the Indian Constitution says that "No person shall be deprived of his life or
personal liberty. except according to procedure by law." According to this article each citizen
in India is guaranteed the right to life. For criminal penalties, including criminal conspiracy,
murder, war against by the government, mob-blowing, killing dacoity including
counterterrorism, the IPC provides a death sentence in India. The constitution has provided for
mercy on the death penalty by the President. (Srinibas Nayak.Sibasis Pattnaik. 2020.capital
punishment in India: an analysis. Pal arches journal of archaeology of Egypt.) Ever since
humanity developed the capacity to think, the relation between the individual and the society
has occupied the minds of philosophers. In every society where rules are formulated, the rights
of the individual must be related to the rights of the society.

3
HISTORY

In the British era, there have been countless instances of Indians being hanged after trial or
even before it. The dawn of Independence brought about a new era in the judicial system of
India. It was in stark contrast to the British Judicial system in which the Indians hardly had any
access to justice, or the time of empires and kingdoms before it when the ruler of a certain state
or kingdom was its ultimate authority and the source of all justice wherein his or her statements
verbatim, were adopted as the law of the land. The ruler thus had the power to condemn any
man to death whoever may he or she be, even on a whim.

After 1947, India became a democratic state, and the system of awarding death penalties too
changed drastically. The Indian Penal Code in accordance with the provisions enshrined in the
Constitution of India provided for awarding of capital punishment for certain specific offences.
(Bachan Singh VS. Death penalty in india.2017).

of death penalty. The Greek penal system also provided death sentence for many offences. The
offenders were stripped, tarred and sent to death publicly. Austria was the first country to
abandon capital punishment in 1787 and Russia did the same for all offences except treason on
the orders of Tsar Nicholas I in 1826, but when the communists took over control after the
1917 revolution, it was re-introduced. Most of the world’s nations have now abolished capital
punishment but sixty percent of the world’s population actually lives in countries where the
death penalty still exists. Most of these live in United States, India, Indonesia and China; death
sentence was suspended in England and Wales the Draconian Acts of Athens, which
established death as the sole Punishment for all crimes, the Twelfth Tablets of Roman law from
the fifth century, etc. Crucifixion, drowning, burning, boiling, and other methods were
frequently used to execute offenders. Beheading, flaying or skinning off alive, flinging the
culprit from a rock, stoning, strangling, amputating, casting before wild animals, amputating,
shooting by gun or starving him to death. Ancient Romans accepted the deterrent value The
history of human civilization there are many reports of death sentence being awarded for
different crimes in ancient times. The crimes and the laws are well mentioned in the ancient
literature. The savage principle of "eye for an eye" or "arm for an arm" and the current civilised
principle of "life for life" are two sides of the same coin. An analysis of ancient criminal justice
systems suggests that the death penalty was frequently used in circumstances of terrible crimes.
The first established or codified law on death penalty is traced to the code of Prince Hammurabi

4
of the 18th century B.C. Babylon. The Hammurabi Code stipulates the death sentence for 25
offences, including adultery (husband and wife having an extramarital affair) and aiding and
abetting. Strangely, the death sentence for murder is not mentioned as the slave escapes from
his master. the initial a member of the nobility was sentenced to death in Egypt in the 16th
century B.C was executed for magic-related offences. The Hittite Code from the fourteenth
century BC included the death punishment as well.

for five years from 1965 and was finally abolished by the end of 1969. America has recently
started to limit the use of the death penalty to crimes like murder and rape. The notable nations
that have abolished the death penalty include Germany, Austria, Scandinavia, the Netherlands,
Denmark, and some states in Latin America. These nations reported no negative effects from
the decision. Over 100 nations throughout the world have already done away with the death
penalty.

The practice of capital punishment has always been a part of the Indian Judicial
system. It was incorporated onto the IPC (Indian Penal Code) right from the beginning in 1860
(Krishnan 2010). During the reign of Mughal emperors, barbaric methods of putting an
offender to death were used. It is interesting to note that the Sikh Emperor Maharaja Ranjit
Singh never hanged anyone during his reign. The British, however, used ‘death by hanging’ as
the only legalized mode of inflicting capital punishment. In the British era, death sentence was
executed by hanging the convict by the neck till death. The same was reflected in the Indian
Penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter referred to as the IPC) drafted by Lord Macaulay, which is still
in force.

5
The Supreme Court of India has ruled that capital punishment may be awarded in

following- Table 1

SECTION UNDER IPC OR ANY OFFENCES

OTHER ACT
120B Being a party to a criminal conspiracy to
commit a capital offence
121 Waging, or attempting to wage war, or
abetting waging of war, against the
Government of India
132 Abetting a mutiny in the armed forces (if a
mutiny occurs as a result), engaging in
mutiny
194 Giving or fabricating false evidence with
intent to procure a conviction of a capital
offence
302,303 Murder
305 Abetting the suicide of a minor
364A Kidnapping, in the course of which the
victim was held for ransom or other coercive
purposes
367A 376A, Criminal law amendment act, Rape if the perpetrator inflicts injuries that
2013 result in the victim's death or incapacitation
in a persistent vegetative state, or is a repeat
offender
396 Banditry with murder – in cases where a
group of five or more individuals commit
banditry and one of them commits murder in
the course of that crime, all members of the
group are liable for the death penalty.
Part II, Section 4 of Prevention of Sati Act Aiding or abetting an act of Sati
31A of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Drug trafficking in cases of repeat offences
Substances Act

6
The Indian justice system is based on deterrent and reformative measures and the inherent
principle of ‘Innocent until proven guilty.’ Thus, awarding of a death sentence is an
infrequent phenomenon in India and it is no wonder that when it happens it draws the eyes of
not only the indigenous media houses but also international media moguls. There are no
plausible statistics as to the number of executions that occurred in India after Independence,
but the numbers may be on the higher side than the statistics claim.

Apart from the dispute on the number of executions, the death penalty itself has been the centre
of debate for decades, with the current penal system drawing the ire of numerous human rights
and civil liberties organizations not limited to one single country. Well known International
human rights organizations such as Amnesty International, European Centre for Human Rights
(ECHR), have constantly been striving in this regard to achieve the goal of worldwide abolition
of death penalty for any offence. It is not only the International Organizations but there is a
consensus within the United Nations itself to abolish the death penalty for good. Till now India
has maintained a clear stance in the international arena on the question of the validity of the
death penalty in spite of the ongoing discussions and debates going on both inside and outside
the country. One of the major achievements of the international human rights organizations has
been the passing of Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000. Before the
passing of the Juvenile Justice Act in 2000, although never practised, the law still allowed
people under the age of 18 to be hanged. In the year 2007, the UN proposed to all its member
nations to put a stop on awarding death penalty in their respective states for any kind of offence.
India firmly rejected the above-mentioned proposal.

CAPITAL PUNISHMENT IN THE EARLY 21ST CENTURY

India preserved the 1861 criminal code also for death penalty for assassination at the time of
independence in 1947. While several jurists presented the idea that the death penalty would be
abolished mostly during drafting of both the Indian Constitution between 1947 and 1949, this
mandate was not introduced in the Constitution. In both parliament building during the next 2
decades private proposals for abolishing death penalty have been presented but none have been
adopted. It is claimed that between 1950 and 1980, around 3000to 4000 murders took place.
More difficult to quantify details upon this number of people convicted and punished between
1980 and also the middle of the 1990s. Two or three individuals were estimated to be hanged
annually. judgment of Supreme Court in 1980 result the death penalty can only be used in the

7
much more unusual cases. India voted against a United Nations resolution on the creation of a
death penalty prohibition in November 2016 saying it violated India's legislative law.

The basic right of all citizens to life and equality is guaranteed in Article 21 of the Indian
Constitution. That means that, except in conformity with the procedures set out in law, nobody
is taken advantage of his life and personal freedom. As of June 2004, a total of 118 countries
(including Canada, Mexico, Australia, Russia, South American nations and most European
nations) have abolished the death penalty in law or practice. Of these, 80 countries and
territories have abolished the death penalty for all crimes, fifteen countries have abolished the
death penalty for all but exceptional crimes (such as wartime crimes) and 23 countries can be
considered abolitionist in practice, i.e., they retain the death penalty in law but have not carried
out any executions for the past ten years or more and are believed to have a policy or established
practice of not carrying out executions.” As it can be inferred, there is a general solidarity
amongst most member states of the world to do away with the death penalty. India, however,
does not seem eager to jump on the boat. The constitutional validity of the death penalty has
been challenged many times. It was first challenged in Jagmohan v. State of Uttar Pradesh in
which the Hon’ble Supreme Court upheld its validity stating that the capital punishment itself
was not unreasonable per se and neither was its abolition in the public interest and hence not
violative of the Art. 19 of the Constitution. It has been challenged many times since but the
decision has remained same.

One of the most interesting developments that occurred with regard to the future of the death
penalty in India was a report of the 20th Law Commission in 2015. The law commission under
the chairmanship of Justice A. P. Shah recommended the abolition of death penalty in a swift
manner except in terror related cases. It is to be noted however that the commission did not
recommend this abolition immediately, but in a way that its complete abolition can be brought
about in the near future. The commission in its report argued that the aim of any penal law was
to act as a deterrent, and the capital punishment was unable to fulfil its role in this regard. On
the point of exception in terror related cases, the commission came to the conclusion that
getting rid of the death penalty as a whole in terror related cases might compromise national
security.

Before giving a verdict on whether or not the death penalty should be abolished, few things
need to be considered. Although India has up to now, stood firmly behind retaining the capital
punishment, the judiciary saves it for the heinous of crimes and it occurs on extremely rare

8
occasions. If we take into account, the number of people who were awarded death sentence and
the number of people who were actually executed, the numbers speak for itself. In the last
decade, there have been only 3 executions, and all the three were of terrorist cases. In Bacchan
Singh v. The state of Punjab, the Hon’ble Supreme Court made it amply clear that the death
penalty could only be awarded in the ‘rarest of rare’ cases which shows the inherent intention
of the court to minimize the practice of awarding capital punishment as much as possible. This
judgement became a benchmark for all the courts in India on which they were to base their
decisions of giving death sentences in cases where the guilty had committed a capital offence.

Thus, not only do the courts exercise their power to award capital punishment in extremely rare
cases, but also many of these death sentences are commuted to lifetime imprisonment on
grounds health, pregnancy, family conditions, etc. Whenever any court awards a death
sentence, it mentions special reasons for giving such punishment relating to the special
circumstances of the case. Is the death penalty valid in today’s world? It is up to the Judiciary
and legal experts.

RATE OF EXECUTION AND COMMUTATION OF CAPITAL

PUNISHMENT IN INDIA

The concept of death penalty exists in India but only seven executions took place between 1998
and 2018. There have been a total of 1303 death sentences between 2004 and 2013, but only
three death row inmates have been executed during that time No single assassination was
carried out between 2004 and 2012. A total of 3751 death sentences have been committed to
life without parole over the past 20 years. Twelve members sentenced to death in July 2007. In
the 1993 bombing in Mumbai, which destroyed almost 260 people and wounded many others
through a special court for preparing or acting out. (Srinibas Nayak. Sibasis Pattnaik.
2010.capital punishment in India. An analysis. Pal arch’s journal of archaeology of Egypt).

9
Table 2
List of capital punishments executed
EXECUTED NATIONALITY AGE SEX DATE OF
PERSON EXECUTION
Dhananjoy Indian 39 M 14 August 2004
Chatterjee
Ajmal Kasab Pakistan 25 M 21 November
2012
Afzal Guru Indian 43 M 9 February 2013

Yakub Menon Indian 53 M 30 July 2015

Mukesh Singh Indian 32 M 20 March 2020

Akshay Thakur Indian 31 M 20 March 2020

Vinay Sharma Indian 26 M 20 March 2020

Pawan Gupta Indian 25 M 20 March 2020

M0DE OF EXECUTION

Currently, the most popular methods of carrying out death sentences around the world are
electrocution, guillotine, gunshot, gas chamber, hanging, lethal injection, etc. Hanging is the
method practiced even in India. It is the most widely used method of execution in the world
today. Firing is also used as a method of execution in few counties. There is reportedly no
protocol for the procedure. Amnesty International began a campaign to seek a global
moratorium on the death penalty in the year 2000. More than 100 nations have legally or
unofficially stopped using the death penalty. The WHO has also urged all nations to do away
with the death penalty.

Hanging Method: Hanging is the method of execution in the civilian court system,
according to The Indian Criminal Procedure Code.

Shooting Method: Under the 1950 Army Act, hanging as well as shooting are both listed as
official methods of execution in the military court-martial system.

10
 CHAPTER 2
REVIEW OF LITERATURE

11
 REVIEW OF LITERATURE
• A study carried out by Sanjeev Sahni, Hrideja Savrin Shah (2016) On Abolishing death
penalty in India: public opinion, Ethics and Right to life. In this, the study seeks to
comprehend the public's perception of the death penalty in India. As in India, death
penalty is only applied in the most extreme of circumstances. Only in cases, where the
gravity of the crime warrants death Penalty is the only option, and no other punishment
seems appropriate. A self-administered survey was developed and administered to
25210 respondents, and it was discovered that 20% of the total respondents supported
abolition of the death penalty in its entirety. The survey was conducted by author using
a random sampling method and survey was also conducted using a convenient sample,
with data collected based on the author's social contacts. Only 20% of Indians want the
death sentence abolished, according to the results and findings of the research that was
done. According to association rule analysis and logistic regression, most supporters of
the death penalty are males in their 20s and 30s. Among Muslim, older, from poor to
middle class, professionals and businesspeople, it was even more found that 23% think
the death penalty should be abolished because it violates people's right to life and 16%
agreed that no one should be treated in a cruel or inhumane manner.

• A study by Ellsworth and Ross (1983) on topic public opinion and capital punishment
concurs stating that most people who support the death penalty would continue to do
so even if it were proven to the individual that the death penalty is no more effective at
deterrence than life in prison. Likewise, most opponents of the death penalty would
remain opposed even if the death penalty were proven to be a much more effective
deterrent than life in prison. People mention it because its importance is obvious, not
because its importance is real. The public does not show much evidence of
enlightenment. They do not show evidence of careful thought. They over generalize
and over assimilate all Possible rationales to their emotional position. The study
indicated that even though over 60% of those who favour the death penalty said that
the statement “poor people who commit murder are more likely to be sentenced to death
than rich people” to be true, only 46% said this was a problem. The majority stated that
decisiveness of the death penalty anything about it because the individual would have
already been put to death. (Ellsworth & Ross 1983 was a good thing because if a legal
mistake was discovered later, it would be too late to do).

12
• Bohm et al. (1990). Demographics and Support for the Death Penalty. identified six
reasons for support of or opposition to the death penalty in the form of independent
variables; they were general deterrence, retribution, incapacitation, administrative
considerations, religious reasons, and support for law enforcement. Using a control
group and an experimental group that was exposed to a death penalty class they
developed a Likert-type pretest-posttest method and found a significant main effect for
incapacitation and significant interaction effects for general deterrence and
administrative considerations. None of the independent variables; group (experimental
or control), race (black white), gender (male or female) was significantly related to
retribution, religious reasons, or support for police.

• Keil and Vito. 1991.race and the death penalty in kentucky murder trial. Analysed
Kentuckians’ attitudes toward capital punishment using a telephone survey of 811
households in Kentucky and fear of crime as a basis for support or opposition to the
death penalty. The study indicated as others have that to have a single measure is
inadequate for grasping the entire concept of the death penalty. To understand the
nature of support for capital punishment both general and specific beliefs of the
respondent must be robed along with other aspects of the penalty considered. The study
indicated that fear is influenced directly by a number of exogenous variables. Older
respondents are more likely than others to feel that their neighbourhoods are not safe,
and blacks are more likely than whites to report their neighbourhoods are unsafe.

• Keil and Vito.1991. fear of crime and attitudes toward capital punishment: a structural
equations model. The study concluded that different segments of the population view
the death penalty in different ways. Non whites, women, and respondents from low-
income households are re likely to have less direct support for the death penalty,
whereas whites, men, and respondents from moderate and upper-level incomes
demonstrated stronger support. Further, the study found that perceptions of
neighbourhood safety influence the level of support for the death penalty. The more
fear within the individuals’ neighbourhoods, the more likely they are to support capital
punishment. Fear was also found to play a crucial role in mediating the influence of
race, age, education, and the experience of victimization by violent crime. The findings
from Kentucky show that segments of the population still differ significantly from this
supposedly mainstream opinion that there is overwhelming national consensus of
support of capital death penalty.

13
• Criminologist Robert Bohm. american death penalty opinion, 1936-1986: a critical
examination of the Gallup polls. The Author examined the extent to which demographic
variables such as age, gender, education, geographic region, and political affiliation
correlated with support or opposition to the death penalty in the 21 polls on the topic
carried out by the Gallup organizations between 1936 and 1986. Bohm concluded that
the whites, wealthier people, males, Republicans, and Westerners have tended to
support the death penalty more than lacks, poorer people, females, Democrats, and
Southerners. He cautioned that the ignorance of the public about the administration of
the death penalty, the infrequency of executions in the 10s and 1980s, and the nature of
the questions asked by the polls all are where factors that cast dot on what to make of
the apparent widespread support of capital punishment at that time.

• Lambert E G. Pasupuleti S Bhimarasetty. 2008.Views on the death penalty among

college students in India. In this paper, the students who conducted this study mainly
focused about the history of death penalty, sections of death penalty, which type of
cases death penalty has been imposed, that include murder, waging war against the
state, mutiny, sacrificial killing of widows, a second conviction of drug trafficking,
abetting of suicide of a child or a person who is insane, incompetent or intoxicated and
attempted murder while serving a life sentence, and also the public opinion about death
penalty. The sample was collected from student enrolled in 20 undergraduate classes of
a metropolitan public university in the state of Andhra Pradesh. In ancient India death
penalty was common for the offender who commit crime. Majority of the individuals
does not favour death penalty, instead they are suggesting life imprisonment without
parole. This is because of the innocent people being executed. Many abolitionists
contend that the death penalty is immoral, uncivilized, and cruel. Some people argue
that death penalty does not decrease violence but rather leads to more violence. It is
also found that caste status is also important in death penalty.

• A study carried out by James Unnever (2010) on global support for the death penalty
has focused on analysing these statistics to see whether the abolition movement had
brought about a new "collective sensibility" about the death penalty or whether
sentiments about the death sentence around the world were stable, marked by severe
divisions. The study presupposes that the sustainability of When the vast majority of
people in the globe reject, the abolition will be ensured. The results observed by author
show that there are significant global cleavages support for the death penalty.

14
 According to the frequencies, Author noticed that Taiwan has the highest percentage of
respondents who favour the death sentence (83.2%), while Iceland has the lowest
percentage (13.4%). The majority of respondents (65.8 percent) from Columbia and the
minority (9.4 percent) from Thailand favoured the rehabilitation of inmates. The
percentage of people who favoured retaliation was highest in Korea (54.2%) and lowest
in Denmark (12.8%). Ireland had the lowest percentage and Netherlands had the highest
percentage of respondents (47.2%) who favoured being incapacitated or imprisoned for
the sake of public safety. Thailand had the highest proportion of respondents who
favoured deterrence (58.1%), while Estonia had the lowest proportion (1.6%). It is
remarkable that Thailand and the following nation, the Philippines differ by 21
percentage points.

• Steven E Barkan.Steven F Cohn. 2010.contemporary regional differences in support

by whites for the death penalty: a research note. In examining the GSS data the first
research question asked if there were racial differences in death penalty support. The
data report revealed that 72.4% of the white respondents supported capital
punishment, while only 43.9% of the black respondents supported I the difference of
over 28 percentage points was statistically significant. The second question asked
whether or not the racial divide was enduring. It was concluded that the racial divide
could not only be considered enduring but the black and white trends in death penalty
support were also parallel. Further enduring support was found in the regression
models. Results revealed three relevant findings. First, there were significant
differences between blacks and whites in death penalty support. Second, the
differences endured over time. Finally, the study was Able to confirm the existence
and enduring nature of this divide and provide evidence that black and white support
for the death penalty appeared to be equally affected by the same linear and nonlinear
are secular trends, but the tests of the aforementioned explanations for this divide all
failed to substantially lessen the direct effects of race on death penalty support.

15
• Oko Elechi. Eric Glambert and Lois Ventura. 2006. They studied on "An Examination
of death penalty views of Nigerian and US college students: an Exploratory study"
focused on Examining college student's opinions on the death penalty and related topics
in Nigeria and the United States, is the main objective of this study. This investigation
aims to provide three key answers. First, are there distinctions between Nigerian and
American college students' levels of support for the death penalty? Understanding the
justifications given by the students for either supporting or opposing the death sentence
is the study's second goal. This study's third goal is to consider the variation in support
or opposition for the death penalty. The study's findings reveal both similarities and
contrasts between Nigerian and American college students' opinions on the death
sentence.

• Results of the study observed was students from Nigeria were marginally more likely
to support the death penalty and students in the United States were somewhat more
inclined to favour the death penalty. students from Nigeria had a higher likelihood of
marking an unclear variable in the survey. In terms of their varying degrees of hostility
to the death penalty, two groups were comparable. When the measure was divided into
three categories—support, undecided, and opposed—the differences were less obvious.
64% of students in the US supported the death penalty to some extent, 6% were unsure,
and 30% were against it. Similar to this, 31% of Nigerian students opposed the death
penalty, 11% were unsure, and 58% supported it in some way. The death penalty
measure served as the dependent variable in a multi-variate analysis along with gender,
age, and academic level, having religious affiliation and importance of religion as
independent variables and the death penalty measure as the dependent variable.Author
Eric G Lambert published in 2008 Based upon the survey data from students at the
public university. Research on the death penalty views of criminal justice students and
whether they differ from other students. Based upon survey data from students at a
public Midwestern university, the death penalty views of criminal justice majors and
non‐criminal justice majors were examined along with why these two groups of
students support or oppose the death penalty. Criminal justice students were
discouraged and were supportive to death penalty. Non-criminal justice students likely
to agree with forgiveness and the death penalty may cause violence in society.

• According to Robert L young 1994 data from the General Social Survey, about 83
percent of whites compared to 57 percent of blacks favour the death penalty. This paper

16
 focuses on the sources of whites’ support for the death penalty. It investigates whether
white support for the death penalty is influenced by racial attitudes toward blacks and
perceptions associated with poor and economically disadvantaged groups. Data were
used from the General Social Survey from 1974 to 1994.The findings show that support
for the death penalty among whites is influenced, in part, by racial attitudes and
perceptions associated with blacks. It was viewed that support for death penalty among
whites is based on attribute criminal behaviours to characteristics of criminal. Support
among blacks is predicted, and they more supported the death penalty because they
faced lots of problems of racism.

• A study conducted by Srinibas Nayak on capital punishment in India analysed that most
people oppose death penalty. It has been evaluated that termination of a human being
is unethical and reveals a lack of regard for human life. The opposition of death penalty
means no one favours or supports the defendant. Even the nasty perpetrator persists an
individual with a collective human dignity so that everyone is valued. The paper
observe that the Indian Supreme Court is leaving capital punishment because more
emphasis is placed upon the alternative methods of punishment and existing
international development it against death penalty.

• Author Eric G Lambert published in 2008 Based upon the survey data from students at the
public university. Research on the death penalty views of criminal justice students and whether
they differ from other students. Based upon survey data from students at a public Midwestern
university, the death penalty views of criminal justice majors and non‐criminal justice majors
were examined along with why these two groups of students support or oppose the death
penalty. Criminal justice students were discouraged and were supportive to death penalty. Non-
criminal justice students likely to agree with forgiveness and the death penalty may cause
violence in society.

• Responses to a general question regarding the use of the death penalty were compared
with the sentences that respondents chose in a set of scenarios describing homicide
cases. The percentage of respondents who assigned the death sentence in one or more
of the following scenarios was higher than those who favoured the death penalty in the
abstract question, but there were inconsistencies in the answers. A majority assigned
the death penalty only for the most heinous offender described, and the figures were
lower for other crimes, even clear cases of first-degree murder. At the same time, a
manipulation involving information about methods of execution did not affect answers.

17
 These results strongly suggest that the abstract questions typically used in public
opinion polls do not accurately reflect the public's feelings about use of the death
penalty in specific cases. More generally, research on public opinion regarding criminal
justice policies should survey a variety of specific circumstances.

• The author Sarat and Vidmar’s are recruited as volunteers for study of an American
community. here they studied nearly 39 University of Western Ontario undergraduates
.in this experiment groups were exposed to information material and group discussion
and control groups simply completed the patr- and post questionnaires' first question at
contained designed to obtain basic biographical information, religious, political
attitudes of capital punishment issue. Public attitudes towards death penalty are
measured with 7-point scale, from strongly favour to very strongly opposed to the death
penalty. opinion in the experimental subject changed from about 33percent opposing
capital punishment on the post-test this study suggests that under certain conditions
attitude towards the death penalty also changes

• Public opinion on the death penalty in Singapore survey findings in 2016 survey was
conducted on Singaporean regarding their attitudes toward the capital punishment.
Singapore's position is the use of death penalty is primarily matter of criminal justice
to be decided by its people and the government.to what extent is it's use truly supported
by Singaporeans? To answer that question a small-scale survey was have been done in
1500 Singaporeans aged between 18 to 74 yrs. On their support and the type of
scenarios where there is support .it is the first large scale survey to be carried out in
Singapore .it is hoped that the result of this survey will give information among
academic, policy maker and the civil society in Singapore on the use of death penalty

• Author Ruth Endom Mbah, Tanisha pranidipine forcha wasum (2019) The goal of this
study is to examine the effects of the death sentence on the relatives of those who have
been executed, those of murder victims, and those of those who have been killed. The
subject of this paper's in-depth investigation of various facts and supporting data is the
death punishment in the USA. The 31 states whose laws provide the death penalty as a
form of punishment receive particular emphasis punishment. The evidence examined
shows that the death penalty has substantial effects on all people. Families on all sides,
including victim and offender, as well as the entire American population. more
specifically, the proof demonstrates that while some of the killed children grow up

18
without emotional or financial issues, the majority of them do not. Authors' calculations
were modified in 2019 from data from the Death Penalty Information Centrex’s had 41
executions out of 96 during the 2015–2019 time period, according to calculations based
on data from the 2019 Death Penalty Information Centre, there were 29 executions in
2015, 20 in 2016, 23 in 2017, and 25 in 2018. only two executions have been recorded
as of February 2019 thus far. There is just one-woman, Exact execution day was
September 30, 2015. These figures also demonstrated that white people made up the
bulk of the murder victims. Unexpectedly, more white murders have performed
between 2015 and 2019.

19
 CHAPTER 3
METHODOLOGY

20
 METHODOLOGY

A Questionnaire is prepared in google form with 15 questions on the topic "public opinion on
death penalty", which is circulated among the people of Dakshina Kanada district, Karnataka.
The survey was prepared in English as it is a common language.

Opinion of each individual is collected and analysed, based on their response.

Opinions were analysed based on their age, gender, educational status, employment status and
the area where they live. The age group was divided into 4 categories which includes people
between 10-20 years, 20-30 years, 30-40 years and 40 or above. The educational status of
respondents was categorized as school/Diploma and UG/PG/Ph.D. The employment status of
respondents included students, working, unemployed and others. Opinion of respondents were
analysed based on the area where they live which includes rural, urban and semi-urban.
Participants were also given with a choice between the death penalty, life imprisonment
without the possibility of parole and prison term of their choice. Based on the data collected on
different variables we calculated the frequency, count and percent. We were able to conclude
how strongly people of different variables supported death penalty as a mean of punishment in
India based on the statistical analysis. Based on the data we have collected a pie chart was also
made for easy representation of the result.

OBJECTIVES

•Analysis of public opinion on death penalty based on age category.

•Analysis of public opinion on death penalty based on gender.

•Analysis of public opinion on death penalty based on educational status.
•Analysis of public opinion on death penalty based on employment status.

•Analysis of public opinion on death penalty based on area where they live

21
NEED OF THE STUDY

To analyse how strongly people support or oppose the death penalty as a mean of punishment
in India. Public opinion is important to democracy because it encourages government to act in
the best interest of the people.

UNIVERSE, SAMPLE AND SAMPLING TECHNIQUES:

Population of Dakshina Kannada District of Karnataka state. Survey and data collected
through google form.

TOOLS OF DATA COLLECTION:

Google form is used to collect and analyse the data

DATA COLLECTION PROCEDURE:

The participants voluntarily completed the survey without compensation. It was estimated that
the survey would take between 10-15 minutes to complete. Over a 2-week period during
August 2022 survey were handed out and collected through google form in Dakshina Kannada
district. Aim and objective were studied and the primary data collected was analyzed and graph
was prepared from the data.

22
 CHAPTER 4
DATA ANALYSIS

23
 ANALYSIS
The goal of this research was to examine public opinion on death penalty as a means
of punishment for crimes. While focusing on opinions, another goal of this Study was to gather
information about the variables that influence respondents’ willingness to Support capital
punishment. Principal hypotheses predicted that females, people of age 40 or above,
unemployed, with school/diploma educational status, living in rural area would be positively
related to support for the death penalty.

Out of 254 respondents 209 participants supported death penalty, and 45 opposed death
penalty i.e., 82.28 percent supported and 17.72 opposed. In addition, the Participants were
given with a choice between the death penalty, life imprisonment without the possibility of
parole and prison term of their choice. 57.74 percent supported death penalty, 32.15 percent
supported life imprisonment without parole and 10.10 percent supported prison term of their
choice.

The characteristics of the participants are summarized in Table 3. Examining Table 3, Majority
of the participants were male (50.39%), people in the age group between 20-30 (71.26%), with
educational status UG/PG/Ph.D. (85.43%), students (62.60) %), living in rural area (42.91).

First variable on the table was based on gender which is divided into male, female and
non-binary. Almost 50% (50.39%) participants were male while 49% (49.22%) were females
and less than 1% (0.39%) participants were nonbinary.

Second variable on the table was based on age of the participant, which is divided into
four age categories such as 10-20, 20-30, 30-40, 40or above. Out of these, majority of the
participants comes between the age group 20 to 30 with 71% (71.26%). The percent of
participants between the age 10 to 20 is 14.57%, 30 to 40 is 6.69%, and 40 or above is 7.48%.

Third variable on the table was based on educational status of the participants, which is
divided into two levels that includes school/diploma and UG/PG/Ph.D. Most of the participants
were UG/PG/Ph.D. with 85% (85.43%). Only a few participants were of the level
school/diploma with 15% (14.57%).

Fourth variable on the table was based on employment status of the participants, which
is divided into four categories that includes student, working, unemployed and others. Majority

24
of the participants were students with 63% (62.60%), the percent of participants who are
working is 26% (25.98%), unemployed is 6% (5.91%) and others is 5% (5.51%).

Fifth variable on the table was area where the participants live, which is categorized into
rural, urban and semi urban. The percent of participants who lived in rural area comprised of
43% (42.91%), the percent of participants in urban is 32% (31.71%) and semi urban is 26%
(26.28%).

Table 3

Characteristics of Respondents

VARIABLES FREQUENCY PERCENT

SEX

Males 128 50.39 %

Females 125 49.22%

Nonbinary 1 0.39%

Total 254 100%

AGE

10-20 37 14.57%

20-30 181 71.26%

30-40 17 6.69%

40 or above 19 7.48%

Total 254 100%

EDUCATIONAL STATUS

School/Diploma 37 14.57%

UG/PG/PhD. 217 85.43%

25
Total 254 100%

EMPLOYMENT STATUS

Student 159 62.60%

Working 66 25.98%

Unemployed 15 5.91%

Others 14 5.51%

Total 254 100%

AREA

Rural 109 42.91%

Urban 78 30.71%

Semi urban 67 26.28%

Total 254 100%

26
Table 4

Participants who support or oppose death penalty

RESPONSE FREQUENCY PERCENT

Support 209 82.28%

Oppose 45 17.72%

Total 254 100%

Table 4 display the public opinion on death penalty as a means of punishment. Majority of the
participants 82.89% supported death penalty, while only 17.72% participants opposed death
penalty as a mean of punishment.

Chart 1
Percentage of people who support death penalty

18%

Support
Oppose

82%

27
Table 5
Percentage of participants who support or oppose death penalty based on Gender

RESPONCE MALE FEMALE

FREQUENCY PERCENT FREQUENCY PERCENT

Support 100 78.13% 108 86.4%

Oppose 28 21.87% 17 13.66%

Total 128 100% 125 100%

Table 5 represent the opinion about the death penalty based on gender. Female supported death
penalty more when compared to that of male. Here 86.4% of the females supported death
penalty and 13.66 opposed it. 78.13 percent males supported death penalty as a means of
punishment while 21.87 opposed.

Table 5.1

Percentage of support on death penalty based on Gender

GENDER PERCENT OF SUPPORT

Male 47%

Female 53%

Total 100%

28
Chart2
Percentage of participants who support death penalty based on gender

47% Male
53% Female

Chart 2 depicts the Percentage of participants who support the death penalty based on
gender. The Majority of the support from females with 53 percent and support from the

male is less than that of females with 47 percent.

29
Table 6
Percentage of participants who support or oppose the death penalty based on Age

VARIABLE SUPPORT OPPOSE

AGE FREQUENCY PERCENT FREQUENCY PERCENT

10-20 32 86.48% 5 13.52%

20-30 148 81.76% 33 18.24%

30-40 15 88.23% 2 11.77%

40 OR ABOVE 15 78.94% 4 21.06%

Among people between the age group 10-20, 86.48 percent support the death penalty while

13.52 percent opposed the death penalty. When we look into the people between the age

group 20-30, 81.76 percent support death penalty while 18.24 percent of people opposed.

Among people between the age group 30-40, 82.23 percent support death penalty while

11.77 percent opposed the death penalty by people between the age of 40 or above.

Table 6.1
Percentage of support on death penalty based on Age

AGE PERCENT OF SUPPORT

10-20 25.78%

20-30 24.37%

30-40 26.30%

40 OR ABOVE 23.53%

TOTAL 100%

30
Chart 3

24%
26%
10 to 20
20 to 30
30 to 40
40 or Above
26% 24%

Chart 3 depicts percentage of participants who support death penalty based on Age. The
majority of the support were from the people Between the age group 30 to 40 with 26.30
percent of support and 25.78 percent support from the people between the age group 10 to
20.21.06 percent support from the people between the age group 40 or above and least
support from the people between the age group between 20 to 30 with percent 11.77
percent.

31
 Table 7
Percentage of participants who support or oppose death penalty based on employment
status

VARIABLE SUPPORT OPPOSE

EMPLOYMENT FREQUENCY PERCENT FREQUENCY PERCENT
STATUS

Student 131 82.39% 28 17.61%

Working 57 86.36% 9 13.64%

Unemployed 12 80% 3 20%

Other 10 71.42% 4 28.58%

Table 7 display the result for support or opposition regarding death penalty based on
employment status of the participants. Working people with percent 86.36 percent supported

death penalty while students with percent 82.39 percent, unemployed people with percent

80% and others 71.42 percent also supported death penalty.

Table 7.1
Percentage of support on death penalty based on employment status

AGE GROUP PERCENT OF SUPPORT

Student 25.73%

Working 26.97%

Unemployed 24.98%

Other 22.30%

Total 100%

32
Chart 4
Percentage of people who support death penalty based on employment status.

22%
26%

Student
Employed
Unemployed
Other

25%
27%

Chart 4 Depicts the Percentage of support on death penalty based on employment status. The
majority of the support from the people those who are employed with percent 26.97 percent.
25.73 percent of support from the students and 24.98 percent of support from unemployed.
Least support from people with other employment status with 22.30 percent.

33
Table 8
Percentage of participants who support or oppose death penalty based on educational status

RESPONSE SCHOOL/DIPLOMA UNDERGRADUATE/PG/Ph.D.

FREQUENCY PERCENT FREQUENCY PERCENT

SUPPORT 29 78.37% 180 82.94%

OPPOSE 8 21.63% 37 17.06%

TOTAL 37 100% 217 100%

Table 8 represent the result for support or opposition regarding the death penalty based on educational

status of the participants. People with educational level of UG/PG/Ph.D. with percent 82.94 percent
supported death penalty more than people with educational level of school/diploma with percent 78.37

percent.

Table 8.1

Percentage of support on death penalty based on educational status

EDUCATIONAL STATUS PERCENT OF SUPPORT

School/Diploma 49%

UG/PG/Ph.D. 51%

Total 100%

34
Chart 5
Percentage of people who support death penalty based on educational status.

School/Diploma
49% UG/PG/Ph.D
51%

Chart 5 Depicts the Percentage of support on death penalty based on educational status. The
majority of the support from the people those who are with educational status Under graduation
or post-graduation Or Ph.D. with 51 percent and people those who are with educational status
School Or diploma support with 49 percent.

35
 Table 9
Percentage of participants who support or oppose death penalty based on the area where they
live

RESPONCE URBAN SEMI URBAN RURAL

FREQUENCY PERCENT FREQUENCY PERCENT FREQUENCY PERCENT

SUPPORT 69 88.46% 52 77.64% 88 80.73%

OPPOSE 9 11.54% 15 22.39% 21 19.27%

TOTAL 78 100% 67 100% 109 100%

Table 9 represents the result of support or opposition of death penalty based on the area where the
participants live. The people who live in urban area with percent 88.46% supported death penalty more

than people in rural with 80.73% and semi urban with 77.61 percent.

Table 9.1
Percentage of support for death penalty based on the area where they live

AREA PERCENT

URBAN 35.84%

SEMI URBAN 31.44%

RURAL 32.71%

Total 100%

36
Chart 6
Percentage of people who support death penalty based on the area where they live.

33% 36%
URBAN
SEMI URBAN
RURAL

31%

Chart 6 Depicts the Percentage of support on death penalty based on the area where they live.
The majority of the support from the people those who are lives in urban area with 35.84
percent. People those who are lives in rural area support with 32.71 percent. Least support from
people who lives semi urban area with 31.44 percent.

37
CHAPTER 5
CONCLUSION

38
 CONCLUSION

How society views the use of the death penalty as a means of punishment
greatly affects the decisions of lawmakers, politicians who use it as a platform
for election, and criminals who commit the crime of murder.

People have been offering opinions on the subject with little more than
revenge on their minds. In this study, we analysed how strongly people supported
the death penalty as a means of punishment. Majority of the society believes that
the death penalty will deliver justice to the victim and the victim's family. People
say that the death penalty will reduce the crime rate because they believe giving
the death penalty can change the mindset of other criminals. Due to these reasons
majority of the public strongly supported the death penalty as a means of
punishment. Proponents of the death penalty say it is an important tool for
preserving law and order, deters crime, and costs less than life imprisonment.
They argue that retribution or “an eye for an eye” honours the victim, helps
console grieving families, and ensures that the perpetrators of heinous crimes
never have an opportunity to cause future tragedy. Opponents of capital
punishment say it has no deterrent effect on crime, wrongly gives governments
the power to take human life, and They believe lifetime jail sentences are a more
severe and less expensive punishment than death.

39
 CHAPTER 6
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

40
 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

RESULT

Chart 1 presents the results for support or opposition regarding the death penalty
questions. Collapsing the responses into categories of support and opposition, we
found that 82 percent supported the death penalty and 18 percent opposed it.

Chart 2 presents the results for support regarding the death penalty based on
gender. We found that women were more Supportive than men, out of population
53% females supported the death penalty, 47% male supported death penalty and
0% support from non-binary.

Chart 3 depicts percentage of participants who support death penalty based on Age. The
majority of the support were from the people Between the age group 30 to 40 with 26.30
percent of support and 25.78 percent support from the people between the age group 10 to
20.21.06 percent support from the people between the age group 40 or above and least
support from the people between the age group between 20 to 30 with percent 11.77
percent.

Chart 4 presents the results for support regarding death penalty based on
employment status of the participants. People those who are employed, supported
death penalty more with 27% when compared to People with other employment
status. 26% of the participants who supported death penalty were students. 25%
unemployed people and 22% others supported death penalty.

Chart 5 presents Percentage of participants who support death penalty based on

educational status. 51 percent of the support from the people with educational
status under graduation, post-graduation or with Ph.D. 49 percent of the support
from the people with educational status school or Diploma.

41
Chart 6 presents the results for support regarding the death penalty based on the
area where the participants live. Out of population 34 percent support from the
people who lives in urban area, 25 percent support from people who lives in semi
urban area and 17 percent support from people who lives in rural area.

DISCUSSION
The purpose of this study was to examine citizens’ opinions on the death penalty as a means of
punishment for the crime of murder. This study yielded several salient observations. The
majority of the respondent neither wholly supported nor wholly opposed the death penalty:
specifically, 82 percent reported maximum support and 18 percent reported opposition in
differing degrees. This gives the public's views on the death penalty.

Another goal of this study was to gather information about variables such as gender, sex,
educational status, employment status, and area where the participants live that influence
participants’ willingness to use capital punishment.

By looking at the statistical analysis, we concluded that females support the death
penalty more than male, people in the age group 30 to 40 supported the death penalty more
than other age groups, and people with educational status UG/PG/Ph.D. supported death
penalty than the people with educational status school/diploma. Employed people supported
the death penalty when compared to unemployed or students or others. employment status has
not much role while choosing the death penalty. The Area also has an impact while choosing
the death penalty, people who live in an urban area supported the death penalty more than
people who live in rural or semi-urban.

42
CHAPTER 7
REFERENCE

43
 REFERENCE

Sahni, S., & Shah, H. S. (2016). Abolishing Death Penalty in India: Public Opinion, Ethics and
Right to Life. In Societas Ethica’s Annual Conference (Vol. 7, pp. 74-75).

Unnever, J. (2010). Global support for the death penalty. Punishment & Society, 12(4), 463-
484.

Elechi, O. O., Lambert, E. G., & Ventura, L. (2006). " An Examination of Death Penalty Views
of Nigerian and US College Students: An Exploratory Study.". African Journal of Criminology
& Justice Studies, 2(2).

N. Vidmar, T. Dittenhoffer (January 1981). public opinion on death penalty: Canadian journal
of criminology, volume:23, and issue:1, page:40-56, length:14pages

Jeremy mills, Edward amble Ph.D. (1998). public attitude towards the death penalty: journal
of police and criminal psychology, volume:13, page:76-86

Wing Cheong Chan (12 Feb 2018), public opinion on death penalty in Singapore: survey
findings, page:117

Eric G Lambert, Nancy L Hogan (13 Jun 2008). The death penalty attitudes of criminal justice
students: are they different from other students, volume 21, pages 193-212

Nayak, S., & Patnaik, S. (2020). CAPITAL PUNISHMENT IN INDIA: AN ANALYSIS.

PalArch's Journal of Archaeology of Egypt/Egyptology, 17(6), 5059-5065.

Lambert, E. G., Pasupaleti, S., Jiang, S., Jaishankar, K., & Bhimarasetty, J. V. (2008). Views
on the death penalty among college students in India. Punishment & Society, 10(2), 207-218.

Robert L Young (1994), Race conception of crime and justice, and support of death penalty:
General social survey, volume 54

Kyle Aaron Burgeon. 2010.Examination of the Death Penalty: Public Opinion of a Northeast
Tennessee University Student Sample.

44
Bedau, Hugo. (1997). The death penalty in America current controversies. New York, NY:
Oxford University Press.

Bohm, R.M. (1991). American death penalty opinion, 1936-1986: A critical examination of the
Gallup polls. The death penalty in America: Current research. Cincinnati, OH:

Bohm, R.M.., Clark, L.J., & Avenin, A.F. (1990). The influence of knowledge on reasons for
death penalty opinions: An experimental test. Justice Quarterly, 7, 175-188.

Boehmer’s. Clark, L.J., & Aveni, A.F. (1991). Knowledge and death penalty opinion: A test of
the Marshall hypotheses. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 28, 360-387.

Bohm, R.M., & Vogel, R.E. (1994). A comparison of factors associated with uninformed and
informed death penalty opinions. Journal of Criminal Justice, 22, 125-143.

Britt, C.L. (1998). Race, religion, and support for the death penalty: A research note. Justice
Quarterly, 15, 175-191.

Cochran, J.K. & Chamlin, M.B. (2006). The enduring racial divide in death penalty support.
Journal of Criminal Justice, 34, 85-99

Durham, A., Elrod, H.P., & Kinkade, P.T. (1996). Public support for the death penalty: Beyond
Gallup. Justice Quarterly, 13, 705-736.

Ellsworth, P.C., & Ross, L. (1983). Public opinion and capital punishment: A close
examination of the views of abolitionists and retentionists. Crime and Delinquency, 29, 116-
169.

Harris, P.W. (1986). Over-simplification and error in public opinion surveys on capital
punishment. Justice Quarterly, 3, 429-455

Keil, T.J., & Vito, G.F. (1991). Fear of crime and attitudes toward capital punishment: A
structural equations model. Justice Quarterly, 8, 447-464

Mallicoat, S.L., & Redelete, M.L. (2004). From the field: The growing significance of public
opinion for death penalty jurisprudence. Journal of Crime of Justice, 27, 119-130

45