New Delhi, Jan 22 (NationPress) The Supreme Court has, on Thursday, reserved its order regarding a public interest litigation (PIL) that seeks to eliminate the current method of implementing death sentences through hanging.

A bench headed by Justice Vikram Nath and Justice Sandeep Mehta took this step following discussions with Attorney General R. Venkataramani, the second-highest law officer in the Centre; senior advocate Meenakshi Arora, representing Project 39A; and the petitioner-in-person advocate Rishi Malhotra.

During the proceedings, Malhotra referenced a Law Commission of India report to bolster his argument, presenting a comparative analysis that proposed alternative and reportedly less traumatic execution methods.

The bench, led by Justice Nath, requested that he submit a concise note regarding the report alongside pertinent case law.

Senior advocate Meenakshi Arora indicated that Project 39A had provided comprehensive arguments surrounding the option of lethal injection, particularly drawing from experiences in other jurisdictions like the United States.

“It has been discovered that it’s not particularly effective,” Arora remarked, alluding to reported issues and unsuccessful executions.

“What is your recommendation then?” the Justice Nath-led bench inquired.

In reply, the senior lawyer proposed that the matter be entrusted to an expert committee to evaluate potential alternatives and compile further data.

Attorney General R. Venkataramani informed the Supreme Court that this issue is under consideration by the Union government at the highest levels, and that specific committees have already been formed to address the situation.

Taking note of his comments, the Justice Nath-led bench clarified that should the Centre find it necessary to return to the apex court following further evaluation, they would be free to do so.

Ultimately, the Supreme Court reserved its order and instructed all involved parties to submit their brief notes and written arguments within three weeks.

This PIL contests the provision mandating execution by hanging, arguing that this method inflicts “extended agony and distress” and contradicts evolving standards of human dignity as per Article 21 of the Constitution.

In an earlier session, the Supreme Court had questioned the Centre’s hesitancy to consider lethal injection as a substitute for hanging, commenting that the government “is resistant to change” despite the evolving times.

The petitioner claims that death by hanging can last up to 40 minutes, while lethal injection or firing ensures death within five minutes, resulting in significantly lesser pain. Back in October 2017, the Supreme Court had issued a notice to the Centre, acknowledging the petitioner’s argument that a convict who is to be executed should not be made to endure the suffering of hanging.