Why does the Judge break the nib of the pen after passing death sentence?


Since the English rule in India, the custom of breaking the nib of the pen subsequent to granting a capital punishment has been carried on by the Indian judges.

Also Read:

Thinking about a humanist methodology, the judiciary does whatever it takes not to grant capital punishment since the laws should make a discouragement and not abhorrence in the general public by granting any sort of strict punishment.

The practice shows the conviction that a pen which is utilized to put an end to an individual’s life ought not to be utilized for any other purpose. In other words, the pen has ‘tasted blood’ and hence, it should be broken with the goal that it does not end another life.

The judges, generally cannot review, reconsider or revote on a matter, judgment or request, once it has been composed and marked. Along these lines, the nib is additionally broken with the goal that the judge may not consider his own judgment once again.

Also, to express his compulsions for passing a capital punishment, under the convincing conditions, and to guarantee that no one ever commits such deplorable offense which brings such social shame to the guilty party.

 Some are also of the belief that judges simply do away with the ‘tainted’ pen (having ordered the death of a person) as a way of distancing himself/herself from the judgment and the guilt of the same.

At present, over the world, 56 countries still retain the practice of capital punishment and 103 countries have abolished the practice de jure for all crimes, while 6 have abolished it for ordinary crimes. India has retained the practice of capital punishment in the rarest of the rare cases.