Report 202 – Proposal to amend Section 304-B IPC Dowry ... - Jeywin

64
exposure of life to peril that seems to constitute the basis
for a provision for the sentence of death. The Commission
applied this principle while considering the question
whether any other offence under the
Indian Penal Code or any other law should be made capital
offence. The following offences were considered by the
Commission in this regard, namely, adulteration of food and drugs,
offences against Army, arson, espionage, kidnapping and
abduction, homicide by negligence, rape, sabotage, smuggling and
treason (Paras 462 to 540 at pp.156-179). The Commission did
not recommend that any other offences under the Indian Penal
Code or any other law should be punishable with death (Para 3(b)
of Summary of Main Conclusions and Recommendation at p.356).
While reaching these conclusions, the Commission reiterated that
the cardinal principle of willful disregard of human life, which is
the foundation of the sentence of death for the existing capital
offences would have to be borne in mind and the question
examined whether the existing law was not adequate. If it was
found to be inadequate, then before embarking on an amendment,
it would have to be considered whether a precise formula could be
evolved which, while conforming to this principle, could define
clearly the scope of the acts of commission that were proposed to
be made capital (see Para 476 at p.160). Thus, the Commission,
inter alia, observed that where an act of adulteration or arson
causes death and the conditions of Section 300 on murder,
particularly as to mens rea, are satisfied the case could be dealt
with under Section 300/302, IPC and death sentence could be
awarded under the law. If not so, then making such an act as a