- The Supreme Court said – no new facts came up in the reconsideration petition, No need to reconsider the case.
- The plea of ​​the convict’s lawyer AP Singh- Akshay is innocent, the victim died of septicemia and drug overdose.
- Solicitor General Mehta said- God would also be ashamed by creating such a monster, do not be lenient in punishment
- The Supreme Court upheld the hanging of Mukesh, Pawan, Vinay and Akshay in the 2012 Nirbhaya rape case
- In July, 2018, the Supreme Court dismissed the mercy petitions of Mukesh, Pawan and Vinay over the verdict.
The Supreme Court has upheld the hanging of Nirbhaya gang rape and murder convict Akshay. The 3-member bench on Wednesday dismissed his petition. Nirbhaya’s mother Asha Devi expressed happiness over the decision. After this, the death warrant of the convicts was heard in Patiala House Court. The court directed Tihar Jail to issue a week’s notice to the convicts today whether they want to file mercy petition or not. The court will next hear it on 7 January. However, Akshay’s lawyer AP Singh has said to file a curative petition before the mercy petition.
Live hearing from Supreme Court on Akshay’s petition …
The bench of Justice R Bhanumathi, Justice Ashok Bhushan and Justice AS Bopanna started the hearing at 10.30 am.
Justice Bhanumathi told Akshay’s lawyer AP Singh – We are giving you half an hour. In this time, you keep your point and say what you have to say and what is the new fact in this case. After which the court could consider and change its decision.
Counsel said– The police had implicated an innocent in the murder of a student at Ryan International School. The truth would not have been revealed if there was no CBI inquiry into the incident. That is why we demanded a similar investigation in this case as well Which was not accepted. In this case, the victim’s friend was giving interviews with the media after taking money. He was an important witness in this case. He cannot be called reliable, because of that, the case was affected. He was an eyewitness in this case.
Justice Bhushan– What is the significance of these things in the court here?
Lawyer– The boy was the only eyewitness in the case. His testimony matters. Therefore, he is putting this fact before the court. In addition, the lawyer, referring to a book written by former Tihar officer Sunil Gupta, Black Warrant by Sunetra, said that the author has expressed doubt in his book that Ram Singh, an accused in the Nirbhaya case, was murdered in jail. These are new facts which the court should consider.
Justice Bopanna – He is a retired officer. Often, after retirement, government officials do such things through articles and other mediums. These cannot be trusted.
Justice Bhushan– We do not want to go over the writer’s words. This will become a dangerous trend and people will start writing books after retirement and will mention such things which will not be right. So, we do not want to consider it. There will be no end to this debate, if the court starts to notice such things.
Lawyer– Alcohol was found in Ram Singh’s Bisra report. Now the important question arises that how did Ram Singh, who was in jail, get liquor before dying? Why did the police not investigate this important fact? The suspicious death of Ram Singh should have been investigated. But the police did not do so. In this case only, the Delhi government wants the death penalty, whereas in Delhi, the prisoners sentenced to death in earlier cases are still in jail. Anything can happen for the political agenda.
Justice Bhushan – What is the new fact in this case?
Lawyer – I am placing before the court. Those are the new facts. Mahatma Gandhi had also said that capital punishment cannot be the only solution to end crime. Offenders should be given an opportunity to improve through rehabilitation. He was not in favor of capital punishment. Poor people are unable to take legal remedies for themselves, so they are given the death penalty. The death penalty is a violation of human rights and is a symptom of the anti-India culture. In Kaliyuga people only live for 60 years while in Satyuga they lived for thousands of years. People lived for several hundred years in the Treta Yuga. The Delhi government also believes that the air here is extremely bad. Doctors also advise people not to go out in the morning. We live in Delhi, which has become a gas chamber due to pollution. Due to which people are slowly dying in the same way, then why be given the death penalty? (On this statement of ​​lawyer AP Singh, the other lawyers present in the court laughed)
Justice Bhanumati interrupted the lawyer and said, “You should have concrete and legal facts and tell us what was lacking in our earlier judgment?” Why should we reconsider our old decision?
Lawyer– The doctors gave morphine to Nirbhaya. So that he does not have pain. She was intoxicated when her statement was taken before death. In such a way, how can his statement be accepted? Three statements were taken from Nirbhaya from time to time. There is contradiction in her statements. It cannot be trusted. Within 21 minutes all the 6 people on the bus could not commit gang-rape with the victim. The victim, in her last statement, did not name any of the accused nor did she mention an iron rod. The name Vipin was taken in the victim’s third statement. Akshay’s name was revealed after that . The police did not investigate the involvement of a person named Vipin in the case.
Justice Bhanumathi – The Supreme Court has held a detailed hearing in the past on all these facts. On hearing these facts, the Supreme Court upheld the death sentence awarded to the accused. What can we do in such a situation?
Lawyer – By killing a criminal, you can eliminate the criminal, but not the crime. Sentencing someone to death is a violation of their human rights. It is an act of violence. Poor people are beheaded while rich people escape.
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta’s plea from Delhi Police
Mehta – The trial court sentenced him to death after examining all arguments and evidence. Which was also accepted by the Supreme Court. It was a serious, inhuman and barbaric crime that even God cannot forgive. In which only death sentence can be given. God would also be ashamed by creating such demons. There should be no mercy on them.
The bench ruled at 1 o’clock – no such facts came before us that the matter can be reconsidered. After this, the lawyer said – we should be given 3 weeks to file mercy petition before the President. Tusshar Mehta objected to this and said that only seven days time is fixed for this in the law. Justice Bhanumathi – The law has exemption to file mercy petition within the stipulated time.
CJI Bobde separated himself from hearing
Earlier on Tuesday, Chief Justice SA Bobde distanced himself from hearing the petition. The CJI had said that one of his relatives had pleaded the case on behalf of Nirbhaya’s mother. The new bench consists of Justice SA Bopanna and Justice R Bhanumati and Justice Ashok Bhushan replacing CJI. The reconsideration petitions of the three convicts in Nirbhaya have already been dismissed.
Akshay gave strange arguments to avoid hanging
Akshay had made strange arguments to avoid capital punishment. He had mentioned in the petition the presence of Delhi’s gas chamber, Satyuga-Kali Yuga, Mahatma Gandhi, the principles of non-violence and research around the world. Akshay had said that when the age of people is decreasing in the same way due to pollution in Delhi, then why are we being hanged?
Vinay demanded withdrawal of mercy petition
Akshay, Mukesh, Pawan and Vinay were sentenced to death by the trial court in 2013 in the December 16, 2012 Nirbhaya rape and murder case. Another convict Ram Singh allegedly committed suicide in Tihar Jail. The case of a convicted minor is going on in Juvenile Court. In 2017, Mukesh, Pawan and Vinay filed a review petition on the verdict, which was rejected by the Supreme Court last year. The convict Vinay demanded withdrawal of the mercy petition sent to the President. He had said that my mercy petition is not signed by me.
Tihar asked to provide executioner on short notice
The Tihar Jail in Delhi has asked Uttar Pradesh to provide two executioners. Confirming this, Uttar Pradesh ADG (Jail) Anand Kumar has said that we have received a letter from the Tihar Jail on 9 December (Monday) via fax asking for the services of two UP hangman as they ( Tihar Jail) do not have hangman. There is no mention of hanging the culprits in the letter, but it has been said that it may be needed.