Time Has Come To Deliberate Whether State Can Take Somebody’s Life: Justice Abhay Oka Calls For Rethink On Death Sentence
Justice Abhay S. Oka spoke at the third Ashok Desai Memorial Lecture hosted by the Bombay Bar Association on February 15, 2025
Justice Abhay S. Oka, Judge, Supreme Court of India spoke at the Third Ashok Desai Memorial Lecture hosted by the Bombay Bar Association today. Justice Revati Mohite Dere of the Bombay High Court and former judge of the same High Court, Justice Gautam Patel also spoke at the event.
Justice Oka addressed the gathering at the event on the topic- 'What ails our criminal justice system- some thoughts'.
He reflected on the issue of whether there should be capital punishment in our system and said, “The reason is that our justice delivery system is not full proof, there is always a margin for error and secondly we must also examine whether capital punishment has proved to be deterrent and third and most important thing after 75 years of existence of the Constitution, it’s an issue for debate whether the State can take away somebody’s life”, he said.
Capital Punishment
Highlighting that even after 77 years of independence very heinous offences are committed in our society be it offences against women, offences against minors and girls, he remarked, “...when such offence is committed, we have political leaders who go on platforms and they say that not only that we'll arrest the accused but we'll see that accused is hanged and that is echoed in social media, common man also feels the same way…look at the offence, such person shouldn’t be spared, he should be given capital punishment..”
Talking about the aforesaid situation, Justice Oka asserted, “...someday we'll have to tell these leaders that it is only the prerogative of the Courts to decide what punishment is to be imposed and for that, there are well-settled rules laid down by our Courts, but this has all the effect on the minds of the Common Man.”
He further highlighted that there are many cases where Trial Courts impose capital punishment but in many cases, the High Court or the Supreme Court has to let off the accused. “...there are cases where we grant acquittal because there is no legal evidence but in such case, there is a capital punishment..”, he mentioned.
“As a student of law not as a judge even today a case comes before me which is rare of rare cases it will be my duty to impose capital punishment, but as a student of law, I feel that we must seriously introspect or legislature must introspect seriously whether in our system there should be a capital punishment…”, he further added.
Saying that there are three issues which are whether there should be capital punishment, whether such punishment has proven to be a deterrent, and whether the State can take away somebody’s life, he stated, “...these are the three issues…on some other day we'll have to deliberate but time has come to deliberate upon that.”
Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act
Mentioning how one provision i.e. Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act has affected our justice system, he stated“... you go to any Court in Bombay magistrates court or any bigger city, the magistrates are crumbling under Pressure because they have to deal with these kind of cases…”
Judge to Population Ratio
Justice Oka explained there is a huge pendency because of the inability to maintain a decent Judge-to-population ratio. “... so in 2007 it was expected to be 50, today we are struggling…we should have been 50 in 2007, we are at 24 and look at the fact that filing has multiplied…”
Judicial Infrastructure in Maharashtra
Highlighting the lack of infrastructure and how Court buildings are being built based on orders passed in PILs, he said, “It's very very difficult to get infrastructure from the government… I have been part of the Bombay High Court, I have been part of the Karnataka High Court. In Karnataka, the situation is exactly reversed, whatever the Court wants, government gives and therefore if you go to some of the Courts in Karnataka you will find far better judicial infrastructure…”
Lawyers Addressing Media
Justice Oka also talked about how eminent lawyers coming out of the Court after a verdict is pronounced speak to the media taking credit for the Judgment. He sent a message across to the lawyers by saying “...your job ends by arguing to the best of your ability and you should never take credit.”
He clarified that a Judge who sits on the criminal side cannot decide whether the person has committed an offence on his perceptions. “...his duty is to see the legally admissible evidence on the record and after appreciating that evidence, after considering the legally admissible evidence he has to take a call and record whether the guilt of the accused is proved beyond reasonable doubt on the basis of available evidence…”, he stated.
“...As a judge we can't go by our perceptions we can't go about what social media says what the victim says…”, he added.
