Recently, Supreme Court stated that it would make it mandatory for trial courts to order psychological evaluation of the condemned and seek a report on their conduct, before deciding whether death is the only fitting punishment.

The Apex Court's observations came upon the indifferent approach of subordinate courts in following its landmark rulings on the issue of death sentence.

Justice UU Lalit heading the Apex Court Bench comprising of Justice Ravindra Bhat and Justice PS Narsimha said that,“Unfortunately, no other court is carrying out this exercise. At the fag end of the life cycle of a case, we are doing what should have been done by Trial Courts or High Courts if the appeals are pending there. We will incorporate this in our order in some manner that this practice of psychological evaluation and seeking other reports should be followed at the level of the trial court”.

Apex Court Bench further added that,“We are now trying to salvage something that had to be done at two levels before (by trial courts or high courts). All those people who are languishing behind bars and have filed appeals deserve a system like this. We are trying to fashion something now and we want help from all the stakeholders”.

SC Bench's observations came while hearing of an appeal in a death sentence case from Madhya Pradesh.

On the previous hearing on February 14, Apex Cour Bench had directed the enforcement of the Supreme Court’s verdict in Bachan Singh v. State of Punjab which expounded the doctrine of "rarest of the rare" in capital punishment cases.

Supreme Court bench had on last day of the hearing sought reports from State Government authorities on the latest state of the mental health and conduct of the prisoner that, it said, would effectively assist it in ascertaining suitable punishment for the accused.

Accused’s lawyer, assisted by researchers from Project 39A, complained about alleged inadequacies in the existing system of preparation of reports by the probation officers and other officials from the jail administration.

Project 39A works under the aegis of National Law University, Delhi (NLUD) is a criminal justice research and legal aid programme that works on death penalty cases.

Accused counsel argued before the Bench that there is need for having a “mitigation investigator” who could present a comprehensive report on all the mitigating factors in relation to a death-row convict.

Bench, however, downplayed this suggestion stating that,“We want to tighten something instead of adding another layer...We have passed five or six such orders where we implemented the principles of Bachan Singh Judgment. We can also say that for all those cases pending before trial courts and high courts, the modality of psychological assessment and probation officer’s report on conduct etc must be followed”.

Apex Court Bench gave more time to Accused's lawyer and Project 39A researchers to elucidate the shortcomings of the existing system and adjourned the matter for a future date.

During the proceedings, SC Bench also commended the work being done by Project 39A's team of young researchers. Justice UU Lalit, who is also Executive Chairman of NALSA, added that, “You have been doing excellent work in this field. I came to know that some of the researchers did not even have an office. So, I have put in a word with NALSA authorities and they have agreed to earmark one room in the new NALSA office for Project 39A”.

Read Order @LatestLaws.com:

Picture Source :