Indeterminate sentence is worse than death
Crime is considered as an offence not against the individual but against the whole society. In Indian jurisprudence punishment is based on a combination of deterrent and reformative theories of punishment. The punishments are to create deter amongst the offenders. At the same time the offenders must be given opportunity to reform themselves. Various provisions of law provide for different types of punishments and their mode of execution. Section 53 of IPC provides for five types of punishments which can be awarded to offenders. These include Death sentence, Imprisonment for life, imprisonment for certain period of time which may be simple or rigorous, fine and forfeiture of property.
Founding fathers of the constitution recognized the right of ...view middle of the document...
The provision for death penalty as an alternative punishment for murder, sedition, dacoity or robbery with murder, fabrication evidence to secure the conviction of another person for offence punishable with capital punishment finds mention in various sections of Indian Penal Code.
Death penalty may also be imposed for offences committed by members of armed forces under the Army Act, Air Force Act and Navy Act. The government also frames special laws to combat terrorism, to control and punish for unlawful and antinational activities affecting the sovereignty and integrity of the Nation. TADA, MCOCA and POTA are the examples of such Acts which contains the provisions to impose death penalty.
Indeterminate sentence means the prison term, imposed after conviction for a crime, which does not state a specific period of time or release date of convicted person. The goal could be to return the inmate to society or to keep the inmate behind bars for the remainder of his/her natural life. Under IPC the term Life imprisonment is equated with fourteen years of incarceration. There is no Legislative clarification of expression “life” in the term “life imprisonment”. How ever Apex Court in Mohd. Munna v. Union of India held that a sentence of imprisonment for life must, prima facie, be treated as imprisonment for the whole of the remaining period of the convict’s natural life. This opinion was recently restated in Rameshbhai Chandubhai Rathode v. State of Gujarat, and State of U.P. v. Sanjay Kumar, where the Supreme Court re-affirmed that life imprisonment cannot be equivalent to imprisonment for 14 or 20 years, and that it actually means imprisonment for the whole natural life of the convict. It is for the appropriate government to commute the sentence of imprisonment of life as laid down in section 55 IPC and Section 433 Crpc.