New Delhi (India) August 18: The Supreme Court has dismissed a plea to end the practice of executing convicts with the use of hanging, saying another method of capital punishment could be considered only when there is substantial medical or scientific evidence, or there is a lesser painful option, or in case of any violation.

The top court also ruled that the Centre is welcome to form an expert committee, if it wishes, to examine whether another method of execution can deliver a less painful death and also in cases of respecting the dignity of death row convicts.

SC Rejects Plea Against Hanging Method

The court rejected a plea to refer a judgment by a three-judge bench in 1983 which had affirmed the constitutional validity of hanging.

“We are not persuaded that a case has been made out for referring the decision of the three-judge bench to a larger bench for reconsideration of the constitutional validity of Sections 354 of the CrPC/ 393(5) of the BNSS (provisions dealing with death penalty by hanging),” the court said.

Petitioner Sought Alternative Execution Methods

The petition was moved by senior advocate Rishi Malhotra, which challenged the legal provision for execution of sentence through hanging. Malhotra’s plea was to replace hanging with any other method such as lethal injection, shooting, or execution by a gas chamber or electric chair, and argued that hanging is painful and violates Article 21 of the constitution which states an individual's right to die with dignity.

During various hearings on Malhotra’s petition, the apex court had considered if an expert panel should look into alternative methods.

Evidence Needed For Future Review

The top court’s bench of Justices Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta stated that the petitioner has failed to provide sufficient grounds to question the earlier verdict in which hanging was deemed constitutional. However, the court clarified its decision did not imply that the issue cannot be reconsidered if there’s enough proof.

“Before parting, we clarify that the dismissal of the present writ petition must not be understood as foreclosing future constitutional scrutiny should compelling scientific, medical, or empirical evidence emerge demonstrating that the factual and scientific basis on which the decision in Dina proceeded has been materially displaced by subsequent developments," the court said.

Government Says Lethal Injection Not Feasible

Attorney General R Venkataramani who appeared for the Centre submitted that the government had formed a panel to consider the feasibility of alternative methods. Earlier in October 2025, the top court showed displeasure over the Centre's opposition to any reform in the methods. 

The court had also contemplated whether to give convicts an option between hanging or lethal injection, but the Centre stated this in an affidavit to be not practically feasible. The court sternly remarked that it appeared the Centre was not evolving with the times.