The effectiveness of the death penalty as a deterrent to heinous crimes remains highly contested, both legally and morally. While the State argues that capital punishment serves as a deterrent, numerous studies—both in India and globally—have found no conclusive evidence that the death penalty deters crime more effectively than life imprisonment. In India, the Supreme Court has upheld the constitutional validity of the death penalty in the “rarest of rare” cases (Bachan Singh v. State of Punjab, 1980), balancing it with Article 21, which guarantees the right to life and personal liberty.

However, Article 21 allows deprivation of life only through a fair, just, and reasonable procedure established by law. Critics argue that capital punishment is arbitrary, irreversible, and often influenced by systemic biases, thereby violating the spirit of Article 21. Furthermore, the emotional and psychological toll of prolonged death row confinement raises serious human rights concerns. Therefore, while the death penalty may be constitutionally permitted in exceptional cases, its actual deterrent effect is questionable, and its continued use demands careful reconsideration in light of evolving standards of justice and human dignity.