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.
