India:New Delhi
Verdict by apex court today passed out the decision of death sentence for the four culprits. Parents of Nirbhaya who welcomed the decision of Supreme Court who considered the case as rarest of the rare, awarded the four main culprits with death sentence.
Nirbhaya’s father said” It is victory for my family, I am very happy with the judgement”;
Nirbhaya’s mother said” This is not just our victory, this is whole nation’s victory, justice id delayed but not denied”.
The convicts has challenged the Delhi High Court’s judgement in Supreme Court, the high court confirmed the death penalty pronounced by the fast track trial court.
The justices Dipak Misra, R Bhanumathi and Ashok Bhushan decided the case, which shook and grieved the whole nation.
NIRBHAYA GANGRAPE CASE: Things to know
1.The apex court reserved it’s verdict on 27th March on the appeals of four convicts-Mukesh, Pawan, Vinay Sharma and Akshaye Kumar Singh against the conviction and death penalty awarded by high court on 13th March 2014.
2.The 23 year old Paramedic student was brutally gang-raped and killed by 6 people and thrown out of the moving bus, along with her male friend, on the night of 16th December 2012, she died out of severe damage and infections in Singapore, on December 29th 2012.
3. Apex court besides dealing with the challenges of the convicts, deliberating on the issues of quantum of sentence to the convicts as it has been alleged that the court did not consider “mitigation” circumstances of each convicts while sending them to the gallows.
4. While Delhi police had sought for capital punishments, defense counsel had said they deserved leniency considering their financial status and young age. The police had told the horrific crime committed by them, warranted death penalty and the test of the case being “rarest of rare”case was proved and the court also also consider the damage the crime caused to the victim, victim’s family and the mass of society at large.
5. Senior Advocate Sanjay Hegde, who assisted the court as “amicus curiae” had told the court that there is no doubt the crime committed was of “immense proportion” but as the evidence was not concrete, it does not warrant death penalty. Senior counsel also the amicus curiae Raju Ramchandaran, said th eoption of awarding the life long jail term to be considered, Court dismissed the defense counsel’s arguments.
6. During the hearing, advocates A.P Singh and M.L Sharma, who were fighting from the four convicts said the court must consider the mitigation and give them chance to reform, not be awarded by death penalty, they also raised few questions on the evidences collected by Police.
7. On February 3rd, Apex court bench, had prima facie, agreed on the contention with Ramchandaran, that the provision of the Code Of Criminal Procedure (CrCP) relating to the convicts has not been followed in letter and spirit by the trial court.
8. It was submitted that the section 235 of CrCP provides that the accused in the event of conviction would be heard by the question of sentencing individually before the trial judge passes the judgement.
9. The bench had then mulled ways to rectify the apparent errors saying there are two modes-either the case be remanded back to the trial court to pass a fresh order or the apex court hears itself the whole case afresh.
10. The trial court awarded death penalty to the four convicts where as the prime accused Ram Singh allegedly committed suicide in Tihar Jail in 2013 March. Hearing and further proceedings of Ram remained abated. The high court in it’s verdict observed that the convicts fall into the category of rarest of rare, upheld the death penalty awarded by trial court.