Abstract

In India, the evolution of the death penalty is a complicated interplay of ancient customs, colonial forces and constitutional law-making. This study maps the longitudinal trajectory of capital punishment as it shifted across Vedic-era scriptures, through the medieval kraals, colonial legislative codification, and post-colonial refinement. The paper studies how the path-breaking “rarest of rare” doctrine laid down in Bachan Singh v. State of Punjab radically changed the law governing death sentencing in India while keeping it constitutionally valid. It covers subsequent judicial developments which laid down procedural safeguards, sentencing considerations and execution protocols through cases such as Mithu, Triveniben and Shatrughan Chauhan. The study critically evaluates current challenges of socioeconomic imbalance in sentencing, arbitrariness issues, and process inconsistencies brought to light by empirical studies. Dhananjoy Chatterjee, the Nirbhaya convicts, etc are examples of the ones executed showing patterns of implementation in practice. Particular focus is placed on the Law Commission’s 262nd Report which advocated the limited abolition and the empirical research produced by Project 39A. Through comparative analysis with varied jurisdictions, the paper contextualizes the position of India within global abolition trends. It argues that India occupies a unique position – upholding the constitutional validity of capital punishment while increasingly tightening the restrictions on its use. This historical insight provides crucial backdrop against which emerging prospects for reform in India's changing penological paradigm may be calibrated.

Keywords