18 spared noose, 5 freed as Calcutta HC decides 20 death-penalty cases in 2025; highest in six years

KOLKATA: In 2025, Calcutta High Court rewrote 20 deathsentence orders, the highest in the past six years, commuting several sentences to life imprisonment and even acquitting some convicts. By contrast, only two death-penalty cases were heard in 2020.

Among the 20 cases disposed of by the HC last year, death sentences of 18 convicts were converted to life terms, five were acquitted and one died in jail during pendency of appeal. Sixteen of 20 cases were heard in Kolkata and the rest by Jalpaiguri Circuit Bench.

The HC orders follow the trend displayed in recent years by Supreme Court in converting capital punishment into life imprisonment. The apex court had in 2022, in the case Manoj vs State of MP, mandated trial courts to analyse “mitigating factors” like the convict’s psychiatric and psychological health, socio-economic background, age and the possibility of reform before awarding death sentence.

The SC has in recent cases also narrowed the definition of ‘rarestof-rare’ category that allows a person convicted of murder to be awarded death penalty if the crime is exceptionally heinous, brutal or revolting.

Based on these factors, the death sentence of 45-year-old Suresh Paswan, who had raped and murdered a two-and-ahalf-year-old in Kidderpore, was commuted to life without remission for 50 years. His psychological evaluation report said he suffered from mild mental disability and socioeconomic report said he came from a very poor background. He lived in a stable. “His father died before his birth... His life has been reeling under poverty,” the court held.


In another case, the death penalty awarded to a 58year-old convict, Srimanta Tung, who had raped and murdered a 14-year-old girl who worked at his home, was commuted to life imprisonment without remission for 20 years based on his age. “According to the Supreme Court, a convict too young or too old should not be awarded the death penalty,” ruled a division bench of Justice Debangsu Basak and Justice Md Shabbar Rashidi.

In the case of 24-year-old Susanta Chowdhury, death penalty was converted to life imprisonment with no remission for 40 years because the HC held that the crime was not ‘rarest of rare’. Chowdhury had stabbed his ex-girlfriend 45 times while pointing a toy gun at her.

In the case of a 42-yearold private tutor, who had brutally killed his father, mother and sister, the HC held: “Since, we are unable to arrive at a finding that the convict is beyond reformation and that, taking into consideration the age of the convict as also the fact that there are no criminal antecedents, we are not in a position to arrive at a finding that all other penalties apart from death penalty stand foreclosed... We deem it appropriate to commute the death penalty to one of life imprisonment.”

Advocates cited many reasons for the HC disposing of such a large number of appeals last year. Earlier, division benches were saddled with the task of hearing anticipatory bail petitions along with pleas against death penalty, life imprisonment and seven-year jail terms. Following an intervention by the SC, the HC let single-judge benches hear anticipatory bail pleas. This left division benches with more time to focus on the other cases.

“Judiciary is aware that death sentence cannot be a civilised form of punishment. I am personally against death penalty. Our confinements for convicts are called correctional homes and not jail or prison, so why not give the convicts a chance to correct themselves?” senior advocate Kaushik Gupta told TOI.