ARBITRARINESS IN CAPITAL SENTENCING SYSTEM: THE PERSISTENT FURMAN-LIKE CHALLENGE
Abstract
"Arbitrariness in Capital Sentencing System: The Persistent Furman-Like Challenge" is a comprehensive study that examines the issue of arbitrariness in the capital sentencing system. The research delves into the persistent challenges reminiscent of the landmark case Furman v. Georgia, which addressed the arbitrary application of the death penalty. Through an analysis of legal cases, statistical data, and policy frameworks, this study explores the factors contributing to the arbitrariness in capital sentencing and assesses the efforts made to address this long-standing issue. The research highlights the importance of ensuring fairness and consistency in the administration of the death penalty and identifies potential avenues for reform to uphold constitutional principles and human rights.
Keywords
Arbitrariness, capital sentencing, death penaltyHow to Cite
References
Andhyarujina T. R. (2014 Jan 30). The agony of awaiting death. The Hindu, New Delhi.
Bantu v. State of U.P. (2008)11SCC113.
Bhuvan Mohan Patnaik v. State of A.P. 1975 Cri L J 556.
Dayanidhi Bisoi v. State of Orissa 2003CriLJ3697.
Death penalty is barbaric. (2011, November 16). The Hindu, New Delhi.
Devender Pal Singh Bhullar v. State of N.C.T. of Delhi, 2013 (5), SCALES 75; Sher Singh v. State of Punjab, AIR 1983 SC 465; Maru Ram v. Union of India, (1981) 1, SCC 107.
Dilip Premnarayan Tiwari and Anr. Vs. State of Maharashtra, (2010) 1 SCC 775.
Ediga Anamma v. State of Andhra Pradesh, AIR 1974 SC 799; Bhagwan Baux Singh v. State of U.P. 1978 Cri LJ 153; Sadhu Singh v. State of U.P., AIR 1978 SC 1506.
For a moratorium on death sentence. (2012, December 10). The Hindu, New Delhi.
Furman v. Georgia, 408 U.S. 238, 365—66 (1972).
Gregg v. Georgia, 428 U.S. 153. 206 (1976).
Gurvail Singh @ Gala and Anr. v. State of Punjab, AIR 2013 SC 1177.
Halt all hangings. (2012, March 30). The Hindu, New Delhi.