Santosh Singh's Trial: Is death sentence too harsh?

Yes, we all are delighted, now that the case has been decided favorably.

One thing that many people have been seen pondering/introspecting and arguing is whether death sentence was necessary to meet the ends of justice. I have something to say here…

True that all of us, at one point of time or the other, tend to think along these lines. Our conscience is rattled whenever we picture the dependents of Santosh, who are no doubt innocent. But then, this would always be…there would always…ALWAYS…be two sides of the same coin. So, if the verdict in Santosh Singh’s trial has some benefits, it would inevitably and invariably have some adverse aftermaths as well (the most immediate one befalling the hapless family). The former however, in my opinion, far outweigh the latter. Just because the legal and administrative machinery did not/could not deliver at the right time or in a just fashion, and because of which the culprit managed to spread his wings, does not mean that Law should not be given an opportunity to do some damage-control now…now, that things are crystal clear.

True that some innocents would suffer…but is it not true that the social consequences would be far grave if an example is not set at this very moment? What message would it give the perpetrators of such crimes?—that they can evade the death penalty and continue living at State expense as a prisoner undergoing LI? Would that not be a mockery of Law?

Reformatory exercises for culprits and convicts is good; it sounds good at least…yes, one should explore the possibility of reforming a criminal, no matter how hardened one is…but as any general rule, this too has exceptions. And, in my opinion, if giving another chance to the criminal means risking social safety or sending a wrong signal to the society or denigrating the dignity of law or putting the social conscience on the wrong path etc, I do not think that the reformative effort is worth even a try.

The verdict in Santosh Singh’s case is a very specific one. By delivering it, I do not think that the court intends to purge the society of such evils in one go…no…but there is no denying that it would go a long way in disturbing the conscience of potential perpetrators. Fear of Law is not a bad thing, especially not if it has good consequences…it does has its own unique role in reforming the society, though insidiously. And, this is what the verdict would do.

JRR Tolkein, in his famous work, Lord of the Rings says in one episode, “Many who live deserve to die and many who die deserve life…can we give it to them? No. Then, we should not be too eager to dole out death in judgment.” It is a personal favorite…a cogent argument against capital punishment, no doubt! Having a stand point is wonderful…it shows that you are not a rudderless boat or a spineless person. However, I believe that adhering to any particular mindset in the absolute is never a healthy sign…to say that death penalty is wrong always and in all circumstances tantamount to falling prey to an opiniated mindset. Sometimes, I believe, it makes more sense to have the flexibility to be able reshape and reformulate the opinion…and this case fits that category.