Supreme Court Issues Notice In PIL Challenging Mandatory Death Penalty Provision In SC-ST Act
The Supreme Court has issued a notice in a Public Interest Litigation seeking to challenge the constitutionality of Section 3(2)(i) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 for prescribing the death penalty for individuals, who are not from the SC or ST communities, in cases where a member of the SC/ST community is wrongfully convicted or executed based on false evidence created or provided by the said individual.
At the outset, the Bench consisting of Chief Justice D.Y. Chandrachud, Justice J.B. Pardiwala, and Justice Manoj Misra asked the Petitioner to approach the High Court. However, the Bench issued notice in the matter. "Issue Notice", ordered the Bench.
The Chief Justice also emphasized that this matter is covered by Mithu [Mithu v State of Punjab, (1983) 2 SCC 277], which states that a compulsory death penalty cannot be imposed. CJI further stated that even the Judgement of Dalbir Singh [State Of Punjab v. Dalbir Singh, 2012 SCC OnLine SC 107], says the same.
In the PIL filed by Kush Kalra through the Advocate-on-Record Jyotika Kalra, it was submitted that Section 3(2)(i) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 infringes the guarantee contained in Article 21 of the Constitution which provides that "No person shall be deprived of his life or personal liberty except according to procedure established by law".
Kalra submitted that this section mandates the death penalty without the exercise of judicial discretion and therefore it needs to be struck down for being ultra vires in the Constitution. It was also stated in the PIL that Section 3(2)(i) of the Atrocities Act is a grave violation of the right to life and essential freedoms, and the granting of the death penalty without considering the context in which the crime was committed cannot be sustained in a constitutional society like ours.
Furthermore, it has been contended that Section 3(2)(i) of the SC/ST Act contravenes certain fundamental safeguards applicable to death sentences as according to Section 354(3) of the Criminal Procedure Code, the judgment must provide special reasons for imposing a death penalty.
"If mandatory death punishment under section 3(2)(i) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, is allowed to continue, it would defeat the existence of very important provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure namely 235(2) Cr.P.C. as well as sec.354 (3) Cr.P.C. both of which provides for hearing of an accused on the quantum of sentence as well as giving reasons for imposing sentence by the Court. If the Court has no option save to impose the sentence of death, it is meaningless to hear the accused on the question of sentence and it becomes superfluous to state the reasons for imposing the sentence of death. Thus, there is no justification for prescribing a mandatory sentence of death", reads the PIL.
Kalra also relied on the Judgement in the case of Mithu v. State of Punjab [1983 (2) SCC 277] where the Supreme Court of India struck down Section 303 of the Indian Penal Code, which mandated the death penalty for the one, who under the sentence of imprisonment for life commits murder.
Seeking a direction to declare the section as unconstitutional, the PIL states that as the death penalty is irreversible, there is no scope for reconsideration, it becomes imperative that utmost care be taken in awarding such a sentence. It also submits that taking away life violates the fundamental right to life.
Section 3(2)(i) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, reads as: “Whoever, not being a member of a Scheduled Caste or a Scheduled Tribe gives or fabricates false evidence intending thereby to cause, or knowing it to be likely that he will thereby cause, any member of a Scheduled Caste or a Scheduled Tribe to be convicted of an offence which is capital by the law for the time being in force shall be punished with imprisonment for life and with fine; and if an innocent member of a Scheduled Caste or a Scheduled Tribe be convicted or executed in consequence of such false or fabricated evidence, the person who gives or fabricates such false evidence, shall be punished with death."
Accordingly, the Petitioner seeks a direction from the Apex Court to Strike down the provision about the mandatory death penalty as prescribed under section 3(2)(i) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.
Cause Title: Kush Kalra Vs. Union Of India & Anr. [W.P.(C) No. 001197 - / 2023]
