Death Sentence Vs Human Rights

Hey Theja...I think Human Right followers have assocaited human right with criminals only and no sympathy towards victims. Where are they when a victim doesn't get justice, Is it not each one duty to avoid crimes? Why they shout Human Right violation when criminal deserves capital punishment?

Yes, there are lawyers who feels that death sentence should be abolished in the country like some countries where death sentence has been abolished, but also note what Raghu has poited out. Even Mahatma Gandhi said evry saint has a past  so evry sinners  a future for reformation. For getting detail information on the research work contact Amnesty International India.

I agree. But, do you think even this capital punishment creates some fear in the mind of the offender. It's not happening. The crime rate is increasing everyday.

a good question now you asked modarte modfication .

sevral supremecourt judgement/cat judgemnts/high court judgment inrespect of and toards fundamental and human rightas are creamated by all most all govt departments by way of appraching the law commisisn etc then who cares about human rights in every ofice all mostr all human rights are smashed no union /welafre associatios are not taking concern according courrpted mind and bribery . The SCI judgements in respect fudamanetal rgits for fringe enforcement does not foudn except on papers but on pratcial way in daily life pl save the democracy and loyal employees. NO justice for suboridinate staff who are alwyas victims pl no equal pay for eqqal work, serice matters are linked fundamental rights are no right way.

murali postal assistant Visakhpatnam 530001

e mail id: murali_viswandh@rediffmail com

mobile: 09290016534

Hey Theja death sentence is the best punishment of the criminal minds i m agree this processor. the population is increasing every day & crime is also developed every time so this punishment is delete the provision than crime is increased powerfully.                                                  I also agree with u the death sentence is voilation of human rights but we cant say the death sentence is deleted the processor. Death sentence is also help to controlled the crime.

What sentence? Hundreds of innocent citizens are killed in police custody. 

Absolutely correct. Let us not forget the fact that criminals do not go by what is written in the law books. They go by the oppurtunity to commit crime.  Unarmed victim is a best oppurtunity for them. The Right to Keep and Bear Arms is also a human right. This is where the problem is. The improper implementation of Arms Act helps in keeping the law abiding unarmed. No matter what the law says, criminals by their very nature of business will always keep themselves armed. Victims are rarely armed to defend themselves. It is of no consolation to victims of crime whether they have been assualted by so called illegal weapons. Hence the problem or the solution is not death sentence. In order to understand in detail please read these:

https://www.lawyersclubindia.com/forum/10th-December-Human-Rights-Day-28338.asp

https://www.lawyersclubindia.com/forum/Re-Fear-of-punishment-is-more-important-than-it-s-execution-27982.asp

https://www.lawyersclubindia.com/forum/Liability-of-State-in-Death-from-Robbery-28021.asp

A perusal of the Introduction to and the Statement of Objects and Reasons of the Act would indicate that the Indian Arms Act, 1878, which preceded the present Act, was enacted by the British with a view to disarm the entire nation. The said Act was repealed by the Arms Act, 1959. Under the repealed Act, even the swords, daggers, spears, spear-heads, bow and arrows were declared as ‘arms’. Even after independence, the law declaring the said weapons as ‘arms’ was allowed to 1[1]) 1993 Allahabad 291. continue unaltered on the Statute Book. Post-independence, the law makers felt that the rigours of the Indian Arms Act, 1878 and the Rules made thereunder continued to make it difficult for law abiding citizens to possess firearms for selfdefence; whereas terrorists, dacoit-gangs and other anti-social or anti-national elements were using not only civilian weapons but also bombs, hand-grenades, Bren-guns, Sten-guns, 303 bore service rifles and revolvers of military type for perpetrating heinous crimes against society and the State. The Indian Arms (Amendment) Bill (No.49 of 1953) was introduced in the Lok Sabha on 27-11-1953, which was discussed in the House on 26-3-1954 and circulated for public opinion. After receiving the opinions from all the State Governments, legal luminaries, Bar Associations, Judges, Collectors, Senior Police Officers and Local Bodies of their respective States, the Bill was introduced with the following objects:-

“(a) to exclude knives, spears, bows and arrows and the like from the definition of ‘arms’.

(b) to classify firearms and other prohibited weapons so as to ensure –

(i) (i) that dangerous weapons of military patterns are not available to civilians, particularly anti-social elements;

(ii) (ii) that weapons for self-defence are available for all citizens under license unless their antecedents or propensities do not entitle them for the privilege; and

(iii)(iii) that firearms required for training purposes and ordinary civilian use are made more easily available on permits;

(c) to co-ordinate the rights of the citizen with the necessity of maintaining law and order and avoiding fifth-column activities in the country;

(d) to recognize the right of the State to requisition the services of every citizen in national emergencies. The licensees and permit holders for firearms, shikaris, target shooters and rifle-men in general (in appropriate age groups) will be of great service to the country in emergencies,

The problem is that we have lost sight of the fact RKBA is a natural, human and fundamental right guaranteed by our Constitution, also we have lost sight of the objectives and reasons of Arms Act 1959. Arms Act 1959 was passed NOT to curb or restrict gun ownership from citizens but to co-ordinate their rights. It can be ascertained from the objective (c) highlighted in yellow above. These rights being co-ordinated by Arms Act 1959 are nothing but the rights of fundamental rights of Self Defense and RKBA.

Dear Theja

I am very much with you. If we delete the death provision, its not possible in any manner to control crimes. Death penalty is awarded only in rarest of the rare case and there are two forums for appeal. So there is no chance of misuse of it. Similarly the person who are awarded death punishment doesn't deserve to be termed as "human" .So no question of preserving their right arises. Its also a medium of popularity or you can say personal concern who are creating hue and cry in the name of human rights. Can they act similarly, if ony one of their family member will be the victim of such crime for which the criminal is awarded death sentence.

" death sentence is violation of human rights."

I AGREE AND SUPPORT IT.

" Even Mahatma Gandhi said evry saint has a past  "

IS IT? THANKS MR ASSUMI.

" The crime rate is increasing everyday."

CAPITAL PUNISHMENT ALREADY IN INDIA, THEN WHY CRIME RATE INCRISING?

CAPITAL PUNISHMENT ( IE DEATH SENTENCE, BECAUSE LIFE IMPRISONMENT ALSO CALLED AS CAPITAL PUNISHMENT) FAILED TO STOP CRIME.

THOSE WHO DO CRIME WITH INTENTION TO EARN MONEY DO NOT CARE THE CAPITAL PUNISHMENT.

HIGH EARNING WITHOUT WORK ATTRACTS THEM HEAVILY. THEREFORE THEY  DO'NT CARE.

Do you think death sentence is a right punishment to regulate the criminal minds?

NO. NOT AT ALL.