INDIA
CitationAIR 1982 SC 1325, (1982) 3 SCC 24
CourtSupreme Court of India (Constitution Bench)
Date16 August 1982
Year1982
BenchY.V. Chandrachud CJ, P.N. Bhagwati, N.L. Untwalia, Syed Murtaza Fazal Ali, A.D. Koshal JJ.
Acts/ArticlesArticle 14, Article 19, Article 21, IPC Section 302, CrPC Section 354(3)
CategoryConstitutional Law, Criminal Law

Key Principle Established

Death penalty is constitutional but must be imposed only in the "rarest of rare" cases. Life imprisonment is the rule; death sentence is the exception.

Brief Facts

The constitutional validity of the death penalty under Section 302 IPC was challenged. The question was whether death penalty as an alternative punishment for murder violates Articles 14, 19, and 21 of the Constitution.

Ratio Decidendi

By a 4:1 majority, the Constitution Bench upheld the constitutional validity of death penalty but established the “rarest of rare” doctrine:

  • Death sentence should be imposed only when the alternative of life imprisonment is unquestionably foreclosed
  • The court must give special reasons for imposing death penalty (Section 354(3) CrPC)
  • Both aggravating and mitigating circumstances must be weighed
  • The balance must clearly tilt in favour of death sentence for it to be imposed
  • Life imprisonment is the rule; death sentence is the exception

Justice Bhagwati’s Dissent

Justice P.N. Bhagwati delivered a powerful dissent, arguing that the death penalty is unconstitutional as it violates Articles 14 and 21. He argued that the discretion vested in judges makes its application inherently arbitrary.

Impact & Significance

The “rarest of rare” doctrine remains the governing standard for death penalty in India. Every subsequent death sentence case applies the Bachan Singh framework. The judgment has been cited thousands of times and continues to shape India’s approach to capital punishment.

Tags & Related Topics

Constitutional Law Criminal Law Article 14 Article 19 Article 21 IPC Section 302 CrPC Section 354(3)
← Previous Judgment Attorney General of India v. Lachma Devi
Next Judgment → Bandhua Mukti Morcha v. Union of India

Related Judgments

1982

Randhir Singh v. Union of India

(1982) 1 SCC 618

Equal pay for equal work is a constitutional goal derivable from Articles 14, 16, and 39(d) read together.

Read Analysis
2020

Vineeta Sharma v. Rakesh Sharma

(2020) 9 SCC 1

Daughters have equal coparcenary rights by birth under the Hindu Succession (Amendment) Act, 2005 — irrespective of whether the father…

Read Analysis
1984

B.S. Minhas v. Indian Statistical Institute

(1984) 1 SCC 131

An institution receiving government grants is "State" under Article 12. Employees of such bodies are entitled to Article 14 and…

Read Analysis

Disclaimer

This judgment summary is for educational and research purposes. While care has been taken to accurately represent the ratio and findings, for authoritative reference always consult the original judgment text from official sources (SCC Online, AIR, Manupatra, or court websites).

Need Case Law Research or Legal Representation?

22+ years of practice before Punjab & Haryana High Court and Supreme Court of India.

Call: +919915442266