BACHAN SINGH V. STATE OF PUNJAB

The apex court laid down the doctrine of “rarest of rare case” for the purposes of

awarding of death penalty. Thus the case laid down a strong foundation for sorting out an extraordinary

case with prevailing special circumstances, whereupon death penalty be imposed on the accused, his case

being a rarest of rare one. Thus a significant limitation on the arbitrary imposition death penalty was

solidifying in the form of the “rarest of rare” principle which has now become the yardstick for awarding

death penalty by Indian Judiciary

It was argued by the Appellant that the imposition of death penalty under Section 302 of

IPC, read with Section 354 (3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure was arbitrary and unreasonable because

(a) it was cruel and inhuman, disproportionate and excessive, (b) it was totally unnecessary and did not

serve any social purpose or advance any constitutional value and (c) the discretion conferred on the

court to award death penalty was not guided by any policy or principle laid down by the legislature but

was wholly arbitrary. On the other hand, the same was defended by the State that the question of

constitutional validity of the death penalty had stood concluded by the decision of a Constitution Bench of

five Judges in Jagmohan Singh v. State of U.P. ( AIR 1973 SC 947) and it could not therefore be allowed to

be re-agitated. It was also submitted that (a) death penalty was neither cruel or inhuman, neither

disproportionate nor excessive, (b) it did serve a social purpose inasmuch as it fulfils two penological

goals namely, denunciation by the community and deterrence and (c) that the judicial discretion in

awarding death penalty was not arbitrary and the court could always evolve standards or norms for the

purpose of guiding the exercise of its discretion in this punitive area.