Need to re frame principle in the matter of death sentence.

The Supreme Court on Friday dismissed death row convict and Khalistani terrorist Devinderpal Singh Bhullar's plea for commutation of his death sentence, a ruling that can have an impact on 17 other convicts, including those held guilty in the Rajiv Gandhi assassination, facing execution.

Delivering the operative portion of the judgement in a packed room, a Bench of justices G S Singhvi and S J Mukhopadhaya said that the petitioners for Bhullar failed to make out a case for commutation of sentence.

"The petitioner has failed to make out a case for commutation of death sentence to life imprisonment on grounds of delay," said the Supreme Court.,,,

This judgment clearly shattered the hope of many  of the death convicts who are languishing in Indian jails  for more than one or two decades. Though I have some professional interests in the matters pending before the Hon'ble Supreme court, as I am the counsel on record for the convicts of Rajiv Gandhi assassination case, this opinion is not influenced by that professional interests. 

We can see that human nature behavioral, approach, attitude , thinking, presumptions and relation ships are not always statics in any ones life. Each individual gets changed in different circumstances. We can say some bodies lifes births and deaths takes place several times. A person who is very fundamentalist yesterday get transformed into another form of philosophy today because of some other circumstances. Due to this kind of basic principles no body can assure that any body will live with any one of basic principles or philosophies in his entire life span . So transformation is possible in every bodies life. 

Due to this reason the Supreme court of Our Country has formulated a legal principle in the matters  of death penalty and basic grounds for such principle is that death penalty can be awarded in rarest of rare cases. The cases in which death  penalties were given by the highest courts of the land are very clearly distinguishable from the general cases . The elements of  in- human nature of the accused were highlighted by the Apex courts in those judgments. This kind of inhuman nature makes the accused a non suitor to live in a cultured society. There was no other principles discernible from  the  decided cases. The present question thus arises from the changed circumstances that is as to whether  in view of the lapse of long period in between the actual commission of offence and the final confirmation of the death penalty accused will remain  non suitor to live in a cultured society? 

It revealed that  the transformation taken place in various accused's life during their period of incarceration.  If a first hand study is conducted it can be proved that the accused in several cases changed their views and prescriptions about their life. They are really hoping for a chance to get another life. There are such examples in the past also where the death convicts, who got relaxation in their sentence,  leading a peaceful and clam life. One  notorious criminal who escaped from death penalty is now working as security guard in Kerala. Why not such a chance is is given to the various accused who are already suffered life term of their sentence in Jail . I think judges of our  country should try to realize the transformation path of a human life. No political consideration  should  be a guiding principle in the matter of death sentence. If you are not having the power to give life to any body don't take it. that is all. ( Thamasoma Jyotir Gamaya )