The Supreme Court of India on Wednesday observed that the Union Government appears unwilling to replace the death penalty by hanging with lethal injection as a more humane method of executing death row convicts. The remarks came during hearings before a bench comprising Justices Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta, who reviewed the Centre’s counter-affidavit. The affidavit stated that offering convicts alternative execution methods might not be “feasible,” suggesting a reluctance to evolve existing protocols.

Hanging in India: A colonial legacy

India remains one of the few countries that continue to implement capital punishment by hanging, a practice inherited from British colonial law. Proponents of hanging argue that it is swift, cost-effective, and well-integrated into the country’s legal framework. Despite international criticism, hanging remains the legally sanctioned method for executing convicts who have exhausted their appeals and mercy petitions.

Other countries that still implement hanging include Japan, Iran, Singapore, and Pakistan. In these nations, hanging is considered a legally entrenched and administratively convenient method, although debates about humaneness and pain have gained traction in global human rights discourse.

Lethal injection: The humane alternative

Advocates of lethal injection argue that it is a quicker and less painful method compared to hanging. Lethal injection has been widely adopted in countries such as the United States and China, although complications like drug shortages and botched procedures have raised serious concerns. In the US, some states have reverted to older methods like firing squads or proposed nitrogen hypoxia due to difficulties in procuring lethal drugs.

In China, lethal injection is officially sanctioned, and the country reportedly carries out thousands of executions annually, although the precise number is difficult to confirm due to limited official reporting. These variations reflect the evolving legal, cultural, and procedural landscapes governing capital punishment globally.

Execution methods across the world

Execution practices vary significantly depending on cultural, religious, and legal traditions. Some of the notable methods include:

• Hanging: India, Japan, Iran, Singapore, Pakistan

• Shooting: Indonesia, Thailand

• Beheading: Saudi Arabia, Qatar

• Firing squad: Syria, some US states

• Combination methods: UAE uses either firing squad or beheading; Egypt uses hanging or shooting occasionally

In Middle Eastern countries, executions are often public and serve as a deterrent in accordance with traditional laws:

• Saudi Arabia: Beheading by sword

• Iran: Hanging, frequently in public

• Iraq: Hanging, sometimes public

• UAE: Firing squad or beheading

• Egypt: Hanging, occasionally by shooting

• Syria: Firing squad

• Qatar: Beheading by sword

Global shift away from capital punishment

According to Amnesty International, out of 195 countries globally, 55 countries retain the death penalty, but only a small fraction actively carry out executions. Meanwhile, 112 countries have abolished capital punishment either in law or practice. The international trend reflects growing human rights concerns and the pursuit of more humane forms of criminal justice.

India’s continued reliance on hanging places it in a shrinking group of nations adhering to older execution methods. Legal experts argue that modernization of execution protocols could reduce physical suffering and align India’s practices with international standards while maintaining judicial authority over capital punishment.

Supreme Court’s observations

The SC bench highlighted that the Centre’s reluctance to consider lethal injection suggests a resistance to evolving execution practices in line with contemporary standards. The bench also noted that hanging could cause prolonged pain and suffering, raising questions about the humaneness of the method. While lethal injection is seen as a more efficient and humane alternative, the government maintains that logistical, procedural, and legal constraints may hinder immediate implementation.

Broader legal and human rights implications

The debate over hanging versus lethal injection is part of a larger discourse on capital punishment in India. Human rights advocates argue for more humane practices, while traditionalists stress the legal simplicity and historical precedent of hanging. The Supreme Court’s comments underscore the ongoing tension between judicial oversight, executive implementation, and human rights considerations.

With global trends moving towards abolition or reform of the death penalty, India’s approach remains closely watched. The Supreme Court’s observations may prompt the government to reconsider execution protocols in the future, potentially introducing options like lethal injection to reduce suffering and align with international norms.

Conclusion

The Supreme Court of India’s remarks highlight a critical point in the national discourse on capital punishment: while hanging remains a legacy method, there is increasing recognition of its limitations and ethical concerns. The Centre’s current stance indicates reluctance to change, yet legal experts and international observers continue to advocate for more humane execution methods such as lethal injection.

Globally, execution practices are diverse, ranging from hanging, beheading, firing squads, to lethal injections, reflecting cultural, religious, and legal variations. As more nations abolish or reform capital punishment, India faces growing pressure to modernize its approach while retaining judicial authority over capital punishment. The Supreme Court’s observations may serve as a catalyst for future legal and procedural reforms in the Indian justice system.

Join our Telegram Channel for Latest News and Regular Updates.

Start your Mutual Fund Journey  by Opening Free Account in Asset Plus.

Start your Stock Market Journey and Apply in IPO by Opening Free Demat Account in Choice Broking FinX.