Monday, February 3, 2020

Nirbhaya rapists survive by curative petitions ! - who is powerful ?


Who is supreme constitutionally ?- is it the President, Parliament, Supreme Court or could there be someone strong enough to exercise control ??

Could not understand the news that the Delhi High Court on Sunday reserved judgment on the plea challenging stay on the execution of the four death row convicts in the 2012 Delhi gangrape case. Justice Suresh Kait said the court will pass an order after all the parties concluded their arguments.  Could not understand what this case is about ?- how and why a High Court should be hearing a case already decided by the Apex Court and mercy plea rejected by the President ?  should there be mercy and human rights to the 4 criminals who committed heinous crime against humanity – in what way do they deserve all these. 

They are  death row convicts in the 2012 Delhi gangrape and murder case. They had no concern for a human and killed her in gruesome manner – already one animal is out and was given Delhi Govt support on the grounds that he was a minor – there was no age reference when he committed the crime, but law and people were beneficial in letting him out.  Now during a special hearing which began at 3 pm Solicitor General Tushar Mehta told Justice Suresh Kait that the convicts have been deliberately delaying the filing of petitions. 'There's a deliberate and well calculated design to derail the process of law", the solicitor general told the court while relaying to it the timeline of the case and also the timeline of the legal remedies availed by the four convicts. He informed the court that convict Vinay (Sharma) filed review petition after delay of 225 days while Akshay filed the same after a delay of three years, adding that the petition filed by Akshay before the president is still pending. He said that another convict, Pawan, has still not filed either his curative or mercy petition. Rather, he deliberately filed a delayed application claiming to be a juvenile.

                  Appearing for three of the convicts, Akshay Singh, Vinay Sharma and Pawan, advocate AP Singh cited the judgment in the 2014 Shatrughan Chauhan case to argue that no prescribed time is given to execute the death sentence by the apex court and the Constitution. Only in the case of the mercy petition being, 14 days notice is given to the convicts, he said. He also that the convicts belong to poor, rural and Dalit families. "They can't be made to bear the brunt of ambiguity in law", he said.  What is poor or rural or caste to do with a heinous crime that brought chill in the spines of the society. Advocate Rebecca John, appearing on behalf on convict Mukesh, raised preliminary objection  stating  that all the convicts were sentenced through a common order and were also charged for having common intention to hatch a criminal conspiracy "Common sentence order, common execution." She is now pleading whether the co-convicts can be executed separately ?

The inevitable may be delayed – justice delayed by not convicting the criminals for that heinous crime.  A 23-year-old paramedic student was raped and brutally assaulted on the intervening night of 16-17 Dec 2012 inside a moving bus in south Delhi by six persons, before being thrown out on the road. She died on December 29, 2012 in Singapore's Mount Elizabeth Hospital. One of the six accused in the case, Ram Singh, allegedly committed suicide in the Tihar Jail. A juvenile ! who was among the accused, was convicted by a juvenile justice board and was released from a reformation home after serving a three-year term. He was given a tailoring machine by the Delhi CM Kejriwal.

The Apex Court  in its 2017 verdict, had upheld the capital punishment awarded to the convicts by the Delhi High Court and the trial court. Now years after such verdict, they are moving one petition after the other and questions are raised on legal implications, their poor and rural background, their caste and more. So if a curative petition before the Delhi High Court can stop the death mandate, who has the final say ? – is the Country and Constitution too lenient on criminals – should not such cases end within a short period of time ? – should there not be some harsh punishments which should make one shudder to commit crimes ??

Miles away, in another Country, a paedophile has been sentenced to chemical castration and 25 years in prison after raping a 12-year-old girl in a school toilet in Kazakhstan. The schoolgirl, who has not been named to protect her identity, went to use an outside lavatory during classes in the southern city of Taraz in November last year. When she entered the lavatory located in the school's backyard, she was attacked and sexually assaulted by a 38-year-old man. According to reports, the sexual predator, who was named as Valiev during court hearings, entered the school's territory one hour before the attack. He was sentenced to 25 years imprisonment and will undergo chemical neutering. On January 24, Valiev was sentenced to 25 years in prison. He also is going to undergo chemical castration according to new Kazakh laws for convicted paedophiles.  'The court ruled that Valiev is going to be forcibly treated for alcoholism, drug addiction and is going to undergo a chemical castration in prison.'

Back home, Asha Devi, mother of the victim Nirbhaya  was clearly dumbfounded to learn that Indira Jaising, a senior Supreme Court lawyer, thinks she should forgive the four men awaiting execution for gangraping Nirbhaya. Nirbhaya's mother told ANI she "can't believe" how Jaising dared suggest this, and said it is "because of people like her [that] justice is not done with rape victims". "Who is Indira Jaising to give me such a suggestion? Whole country wants the convicts to be executed. Just because of people like her, justice is not done with rape victims," Asha Devi was quoted as saying by news agency ANI. Nirbhaya's mother claimed that she had met Indira Jaising many times in the Supreme Court but "not once" was the senior advocate concerned about her well being. "Today she is speaking for the convicts. Such people earn livelihood by supporting rapists, hence rape incidents don't stop," Nirbhaya's mother said.  Nirbhaya's father added he wants no advice from senior Supreme Court lawyer Indira Jaising. Badrinath Singh echoed comments made by Asha Devi as he claimed people like Indira Jaising earned a livelihood by supporting rapists. He claimed rapes were on the increase because of women like Jaising, and expressed dismay that she couldn't understand the pain of another woman.

With regards – S. Sampathkumar
3rd Feb 2020.

No comments:

Post a Comment