English हिन्दी
Connect with us

India News

Nirbhaya case: Dec 16 rapists to hang, Supreme Court rejects review petitions of death row convicts

Published

on

Nirbhaya case accused

The Supreme Court on Monday upheld its judgment on the death sentence of three of the four convicts in the December 16, 2012 Delhi gangrape case that came to called also as the ‘Nirbhaya’ case after the name given to the victim.

A bench headed by Chief Justice Dipak Misra and comprising Justices Ashok Bhushan and R Banumathi, delivering its verdict on the pleas filed by Mukesh (31), Pawan Gupta (31) and Vinay Sharma (25), said the convicts had failed to point out “error” in the judgment. The court added that the convicts were heard elaborately during appeals and no grounds were made out for review of the verdict.

The fourth convict, Akshay Thakur (31), did not file a review plea. Advocate AP Singh, representing Akshay Thakur, had told PTI, “Akshay has not filed a review petition yet. We will be filing it.” He has been granted three weeks by the top court to do so.

Last year, the top court had upheld the death sentence awarded to the four convicts by the Delhi High Court and the trial court in the gangrape and murder of a 23-year-old paramedic student on December 16, 2012, in the national capital. The 23-year-old paramedic student, returning from a movie, boarded a chartered bus in New Delhi’s Saket area and was subsequently brutally raped and murdered by six people.

While one of the accused, Ram Singh, allegedly committed suicide in Tihar jail, another accused, a juvenile, was convicted by the juvenile justice and sent to three years in probation to a reform home. The juvenile, whose name is not known (legally, he cannot be named) is already out and has melted into the population, carrying his criminal mind and past. Ironically, the juvenile, who was said to be the most cruel of the lot in the murder, has also been given enough vocational training to support himself independently.

Backgrounder

While the 2012 Nirbhaya case has become the centrepiece of all judgments related to violence on women in India, the first instance of the Supreme Court’s capital punishment (to all four accused) verdict, delivered on May 5, 2017, went through several petitions.

While the Nirbhaya case saw expression of massive outrage, protests and a movement, in the six years since things appear to have taken a turn for the worse with gang rapes, torture and murders, even on girls as young as 8 (the Kathua gang rape and murder case) as horrific as the Nirbhaya case and more, have been reported from across the country.

The general perception was that deterrent legal action was so slow in India that the fear of punishment has all but vanished. Today’s judgment could be one in a series of final verdicts that the public wants to be fast-tracked.

Timeline

December 16, 2012: 23-year-old paramedic student, now known as Nirbhaya, returning home with her friend in Delhi got a lift from a chartered bus (empty, except for driver and helpers) and is gang-raped, brutally assaulted by six men and dumped in a grievously injured state. Her friend was brutally beaten up and left for dead.

December 17, 2012: Delhi Police identify four men who raped and assaulted her — bus driver Ram Singh, his brother Mukesh, Vinay Sharma and Pawan Gupta. Doctors declared the woman suffered grave internal injuries.

December 18, 2012: Ram Singh and three others are arrested.

December 29, 2012: Nirbhaya succumbs to her injuries at Mount Elizabeth Hospital in Singapore where she was transported by the government for further treatment.

December 21, 2012: Accused juvenile is arrested from Anand Vihar bus terminal in Delhi. The woman’s friend identifies Mukesh as one of the culprits. Police conduct raids in Haryana and Bihar to nab the sixth accused, Akshay Thakur.

December 22, 2012: Akshay Thakur is arrested in Bihar and brought to Delhi. Victim records her statement before the SDM in hospital.

January 2, 2013: The then Chief Justice of India Altamas Kabir inaugurates fast track court for speedy trial in sexual offence cases.

January 3, 2013: Police files charge-sheet against five adult accused for offences including murder, gang rape, attempt to murder, kidnapping, unnatural offences and dacoity.

February 28, 2013: Juvenile Justice Board (JJB) frames rape, murder charges against the juvenile accused.

March 11, 2013: Bus driver Ram Singh is found hanging in his cell in Tihar jail.

August 31, 2013: JJB convicts the juvenile for gang rape and murder and awards three years term at a probation home.

September 13, 2013: Fast track court awards death to all four convicts. Trial court refers the case to Delhi High Court for confirmation of death sentence.

March 13, 2014: The Delhi High Court justices Reva Khetrapal and Pratibha Rani uphold the death sentences awarded to the four convicts.

December 18, 2015: Delhi High Court refuses to stay the release of the juvenile. He walks out of a correction home after spending three years.

April 3, 2016: Supreme Court begins hearing in the case.

April 8, 2016: Senior advocates Raju Ramchandran and Sanjay Hegde appointed amicus curiae.

May 5, 2016: SC upholds death penalty of four accused – Akshay Thakur, Vinay Sharma, Pawan Gupta and Mukesh Singh.

November 7, 2016: Advocate Raju Ramchandran argues for sentencing order to be set aside.

November 28, 2016: Advocate Sanjay Hegde argues against reliability of evidence in the case.

February 3, 2017: Supreme Court decides to rehear the case on the sentencing aspect, after the petitioners contend that there has been violation in procedure.

March 6, 2017: All the accused submit additional affidavits in court.

March 27, 2017: The SC reserves verdict after nearly a year of hearing the case.

May 5, 2017: The Supreme Court pronounces judgement in the case upholding the death sentence of all 4 accused.

November 13, 2017: The convicts appeal to the Supreme Court to review their sentence claiming that it was cold-blooded killing in the name of justice.

May 4, 2018: Supreme Court upholds the order on the plea of two convicts seeking a review of its 2017 verdict upholding the death penalty awarded to them.

India News

Hardeep Singh Puri set to win Rajya Sabha bypoll unopposed

Union Minister Hardeep Singh Puri is set to be elected unopposed to the Rajya Sabha from Madhya Pradesh after the returning officer rejected the nomination papers of two independent candidates.

Published

on

Hardeep Puri

Union Petroleum Minister Hardeep Singh Puri is set to enter the Rajya Sabha unopposed from Madhya Pradesh after the nomination papers of two independent candidates were rejected during scrutiny on Tuesday.

The two candidates whose nominations were rejected were Kante Sayanna and Rajkumar Lohani, the latter being backed by the Congress. Their rejection leaves Puri as the only candidate in the contest for the vacant Rajya Sabha seat.

According to an official, the result will be announced on November 5, which is also the last date for withdrawal of nominations.

The Returning Officer, Umesh Sharma, examined the nomination papers on the last day of scrutiny and rejected the two independent candidates’ applications.

Objections raised against Hardeep Puri’s nomination

The nomination papers submitted by Puri also faced objections from the two independent candidates and Congress leader Hemant Katare.

They questioned the validity and completeness of Puri’s affidavit filed in Form 26, raising concerns over whether the mandatory details had been properly furnished.

However, after examining the objections, Returning Officer Umesh Sharma concluded that Puri had not violated any requirements under the Representation of the People Act.

Sharma stated in his order that no defect had been found in Puri’s nomination papers that could justify their rejection.

Following the decision, Katare and Congress MLA Atif Aqeel announced that they would approach the court against the order.

Calling the decision an attack on Indian democracy, the Congress leaders said in a statement that Puri’s nomination should have been rejected despite what they described as significant errors.

Why the Madhya Pradesh Rajya Sabha seat fell vacant

The by-election was necessitated by the resignation of Union Minister L Murugan, which left a Rajya Sabha seat vacant in Madhya Pradesh.

With the nomination papers of both independent candidates rejected and Puri’s nomination cleared, the Union minister is set to be elected unopposed.

The final announcement is expected on November 5, the last day for withdrawal of nominations.

Continue Reading

India News

Yogi Adityanath announces free LPG cylinders on Diwali and Holi

Uttar Pradesh Chief Minister Yogi Adityanath has announced one free LPG cylinder each on Diwali and Holi for eligible Pradhan Mantri Ujjwala Yojana beneficiaries. The state has allocated Rs 1,500 crore for LPG refill subsidies covering more than 1.89 crore beneficiaries.

Published

on

Uttar Pradesh Chief Minister Yogi Adityanath on Tuesday announced that eligible families covered under the Pradhan Mantri Ujjwala Yojana (PMUY) will receive one free LPG cylinder each on Diwali and Holi.

The announcement came as the Chief Minister participated in a programme organised for distributing LPG refill subsidies to more than 1.89 crore beneficiaries across the state.

The Uttar Pradesh government has allocated Rs 1,500 crore for providing subsidies on LPG cylinder refills to eligible families under the scheme.

Addressing the gathering, Adityanath explained the cost of a domestic LPG cylinder and the subsidy provided by the Centre.

“The price of one domestic gas cylinder is Rs 983.45, and out of this, the Government of India provides a subsidy of Rs 335. You have to spend Rs 648.55 from your own pocket,” he said.

The Chief Minister said the state government had decided to provide one cylinder to poor families covered under the Ujjwala scheme on Diwali and Holi.

“With the money you save, you can buy Diwali sweets and lamps,” he said.

Yogi Adityanath targets previous Congress government

During his address, Adityanath also compared the availability of LPG connections under the present government with the situation during the Congress government’s tenure.

He said people previously faced several difficulties in obtaining a single gas connection, while the present government had provided free gas connections to poor families.

The Chief Minister described the initiative as an example of good governance.

Yogi Adityanath on Ayodhya’s Deepotsav

Earlier on Tuesday, Adityanath described Ayodhya’s Deepotsav, scheduled for November 7, as a symbol of social unity.

In a post on X, he said the festival brought together people from different sections of society through shared faith and cultural participation.

He also referred to the Deepotsav tradition initiated by the state government in 2017, saying it had transformed Ayodhya’s cultural heritage into a celebration involving people from different walks of life.

The Chief Minister is scheduled to visit Ayodhya to review preparations for the event.

Continue Reading

India News

Election Commission clarifies Form 6 rules for existing voters under SIR

The Election Commission has clarified that voters previously enrolled in electoral rolls can submit Form 6 for inclusion if their names are missing from draft lists published during the Special Intensive Revision (SIR).

Published

on

Election Commission of India

The Election Commission of India (ECI) has clarified that voters whose names appeared in earlier electoral rolls but are missing from draft lists published during the ongoing Special Intensive Revision (SIR) can submit Form 6 to seek inclusion in the final electoral roll.

In a communication issued on November 3 to the Chief Electoral Officers (CEOs) of all states and Union Territories, the poll body addressed concerns among previously registered voters who were hesitant to submit the form because of the declaration required alongside it.

The Commission clarified that submitting Form 6 in such circumstances would not, by itself, amount to making a false declaration merely because the applicant had been enrolled as a voter previously.

It also stated that no action under Section 31 of the Representation of the People Act, 1950, would be initiated against such applicants solely on the ground of their previous enrolment.

However, this protection applies provided the applicant is not already registered in another Parliamentary or Assembly constituency and the declaration submitted is otherwise in accordance with the law.

Why existing voters were hesitant to submit Form 6

The clarification follows concerns that some previously enrolled voters were reluctant to apply for inclusion in the electoral roll after finding their names missing from the draft lists published during the SIR exercise.

Form 6 requires applicants to furnish a declaration stating that their names are being included in the electoral roll for the first time.

This created apprehensions among previously registered voters, who feared that submitting the form despite their earlier enrolment could be treated as a false declaration and expose them to prosecution under Section 31 of the Representation of the People Act, 1950.

The Election Commission has now clarified that earlier registration does not prevent an eligible voter from submitting Form 6 again when their name does not appear in the draft electoral roll.

Election Commission refers to Delhi High Court order

In its communication, the Commission also referred to the Delhi High Court’s October 14 order in the case of Nilotpal Datta and another versus the Election Commission of India and others.

The case concerned an applicant who had previously been enrolled as a voter but was apprehensive about submitting Form 6 because of the declaration that the name was being included in the electoral roll for the first time.

The High Court observed that the petitioners’ apprehension was misplaced and allowed them to submit Form 6, if they wished, for processing in accordance with the law.

The Election Commission’s latest clarification is in line with this judicial observation.

EC asks states and UTs to publicise clarification

The poll body has asked Chief Electoral Officers across all states and Union Territories to ensure that the clarification reaches concerned voters.

It has also requested officials to publicise the information widely through available media platforms and in local languages so that eligible voters are aware of the procedure for seeking inclusion in the electoral roll.

The clarification comes amid ongoing concerns and legal challenges surrounding the Special Intensive Revision of electoral rolls and the process of re-enrolling voters whose names do not appear in draft lists.

Continue Reading

Trending

© Copyright 2022 APNLIVE.com