Legal Services India - Law Articles is a Treasure House of Legal Knowledge and information, the law resources is an ever growing database of authentic legal information.

» Home
Monday, November 25, 2024

Speedy Capital Punishment For Rapists Must Be Ensured

Posted in: Criminal Law
Mon, Dec 9, 19, 09:48, 5 Years ago
star star star star star
0 out of 5 with 0 ratings
comments: 0 - hits: 3723
Delhi Commission for Women Chief Swati Maliwal who is on indefinite hunger strike demanding speedy capital punishment for rapists.

The deteriorating situation of women safety in the entire country, especially in Uttar Pradesh, is a cause of grave concern. It is shocking that just within six months of the reporting of the case, the accused was allowed to come out on bail. The girl has suffered tremendously for raising her voice against a brutal crime inflicted on her. The root cause for crimes against women is the complete absence of fear of certain and swift punishment in the minds of the criminals.

- Delhi Commission for Women Chief Swati Maliwal who is on indefinite hunger strike demanding speedy capital punishment for rapists.

Maliwal very rightly demands capital punishment for rapists within six months of their conviction. I will certainly not term capital punishment for rapists as revenge but will rather term it as justice for which the victim and her family runs from pillar to post and faces all sorts of inconveniences, threats and what not! But it must be uniformly imposed on all rapists and it is not once in 15 years that a poor rapist is hanged on circumstantial evidence alone as he was so poor that his petition was drafted by prisoners of Tihar jail as was pointed out by senior Supreme Court advocate Colin Gonsalves while in similar other cases the accused are not hanged just because they are affluent and are able to hire a battery of eminent and experienced lawyers who can argue most forcefully on their behalf! This injustice must stop! Why can't thousands and thousands of rapists be hanged just like Dhananjoy Chatterjee was hanged in 2004? Why this selective hanging of rapists? Before Dhananjoy, it was Ranga and Birla who were hanged in 1982 as there was definite proof against them and there can be no sympathy for such rapists cum murderers but what about the other rapists? Why are they spared? Is this justice? Is this equality? What sort of equality is this?

It is being written in newspapers that the Union Home Ministry has recommended rejection of mercy plea of one of the convicts in the December 2012 Nirbhaya gangrape case to President Ram Nath Kovind. The President's Secretariat is likely to decide on the mercy petition before December 16, said people aware of the matter. Vinay Sharma who is one of the convicts facing death sentence for the rape and murder of a 23-year-old paramedic student, had filed the mercy petition before the President. As per the law, the death penalty of other co-accused cannot be executed unless the government takes a decision on Sharma's plea. Three others – Pawan Gupta, Akshay Thakur and Mukesh Singh – did not file any mercy plea while the fifth accused Ram Singh had allegedly committed suicide in Tihar jail in March 2013. Officials said Sharma's mercy plea has been pending for more than four months.

The moot question is: Why does it take so long to decide on mercy petition? Why can't mercy petition be decided in just few hours or few days or few weeks? Why does it take decades as we saw in case of killers of former PM Rajiv Gandhi in which case even in decades it was not decided due to which the killers get the benefit?

Bluntly put: Why so much of inordinate and unacceptable delay in deciding mercy petition? Why can't a time frame be fixed in this regard? Why should the parents and relatives of victim keep waiting indefinitely for mercy petition to be decided?

Does it not make a complete mockery of our entire criminal justice system? Why no attention is paid to this all-important issue by our law makers? Should we be proud of it?

Why is it that in Nirbhaya's case it was only after the case of gangrape and murder of a 26-year-old veterinary doctor in Hyderabad that the Delhi government expedited his appeal? Why earlier the Delhi government was just sitting over the appeal? Why Delhi government did not took the all-important decision of deciding mercy petition swiftly?

Whose interest was this inordinate delay serving? Could it not have been decided in time? It merits no description as we all know the ostensible answer.

Why it took so long for Delhi's Lieutenant Governor Anil Baijal to send the file rejecting the mercy plea to the Home Ministry just recently? Why only interest of accused is safeguarded while deciding mercy petition and that of victim is blatantly, brutely and brazenly disregarded? Should we be proud of it? Why for decades the mercy petition of killers of former PM late Rajiv Gandhi was not decided? What image does this project of India in front of the world? That India does not have the courage to punish the killers of its own former PM late Rajiv Gandhi!

Why can't even President decide on mercy petition as in case of Nirbhaya within few days? Why Delhi Lt Governor took an agonizingly long time of many months to decide on mercy petition? Why does it take so long to be decided?

Why the mental agony suffered by parents and victims families due to this inordinate delay in deciding mercy petition not taken into account? Why is mercy petition not abolished for heinous crimes like rape and terror cases? Why at least some time frame not fixed?

It cannot be denied that the President himself just recently while voicing sharply his serious concern on alarming rise in cases of crime against women had minced just no words in saying plainly that, Women's safety is a very serious issue. Incidents of demonic attacks on girls shake the conscience of the country. It is the responsibility of every parent to instill among boys the feeling of respect for women.

I have the highest respect for President and I fully agree with what he said about women's safety being a serious issue and also on instilling in boys the feeling of respect for women. But I humbly beg to differ with him on just one aspect. Just recently while speaking on cases where minor girls are raped, President Ram Nath Kovind had said that, In this context, several things are coming up. Such convicts have been given the right of mercy petition by the Constitution. I have said that there should be reconsideration on this...In cases under Pocso (Protection of Children from Sexual Offences) Act, they be deprived of the right of mercy petition. They do not need any such right.

With great pain I have to ask: Why only minor girls? Why those who rape even major women not be deprived of the right to mercy petition? Why should there be any discrimination of any kind between minor and major?

It cannot be overstated that a rape is a rape which under no circumstances can be ever justified! Those who indulge in it certainly deserve no mercy! Whether the victim is minor or major should just no matter at all! With full humility I must say that the President must reconsider his stand on this!

The Vice President of India M Venkaiah Naidu very rightly said that those minors who know how to rape should be punished just like others. They should not be allowed to escape easily which sets a very wrong precedent as we see most unfortunately in our country! Why should the minor not be at least sentenced to life who plays with the life of the women in the most brutal manner as we saw in Nirbhaya's case that it was the minor boy who perpetrated the maximum brutality on Nirbhaya? Why should they be allowed to come out of reform home within two or three years as we see most unfortunately right now?

V Narayansamy who is Puducherry Chief Minister while hailing the killing of all 4 accused of gang rape and murder of Hyderabad's 26-year-old veterinary doctor said, This punishment (encounter killing) must be accepted as punishment by the Lord. Criminals must learn a lesson from this incident. He is not alone in feeling so. There is a national rejoice over the killing of these 4 rape accused which is something unprecedented and it is for first time in my life that I have seen so even though some have sounded caution and restraint on this as this would only encourage extrajudicial killings!

Former Police Commissioner of Mumbai MN Singh wondered where the rule of law was. He minced no words in saying that, This incident and the subsequent encounter deaths of the accused is a sad commentary on the criminal justice delivery system in India. People seem to have lost faith in the system because it doesn't seem to be delivering justice and people want those involved in such heinous crimes to be punished expeditiously and sternly, which is not happening.

On the 2012 Nirbhaya gangrape case, MN Singh said that, The case is seven years old and has been lost in procedures. It is frustrating that people are celebrating when the accused are killed in encounters. They feel it brings justice to the system and deters criminals. People are losing faith because the system is so procedure-oriented and so prone to delay it doesn't seem to be functional.

How can the Supreme Court and our lawmakers take all this lying down? Why should a definite time frame not be fixed for deciding rape cases, gangrape cases and terror cases not just in trial court but also in High Court and Supreme Court too? Similarly why should a definite time frame not be fixed for deciding review petition and mercy petition till they are not abolished altogether?

Former Director General of Police Prakash Singh while lamenting at the Hyderabad encounter said that, It just goes to show people's eroding faith in the country's criminal justice system. Look at the Nirbhaya case, it's been seven years and despite the fast track court and media hype, the system has not hanged them (the accused) because the mercy petition is pending.

To put it simple and straight: Does this not make a complete mockery of our criminal justice system and severely erodes the faith of people even in Supreme Court? Why is mercy petition not decided at the earliest? If mercy petition can't be abolished as many human rights lawyers would argue then why can't a definite time frame be fixed for deciding it? Certainly no one will object to this! Only adequate political will is needed as was pointed out by the Vice President Venkaiah Naidu!

We just cannot overlook what Julio Ribeiro who is former Mumbai Police Commissioner and Punjab DGP said while condemning the encounter that, The judicial process system is not working. That is why these short-cuts are adopted under pressure from the public and politicians. Ribeiro is a man of vast experience in police service and so what he says not only deserves a food for thought but the Supreme Court must also seriously introspect on this and try to complete such serious criminal cases of rape and gangrape well in time!

It must also be pointed out here that SS Virk who served as DGP of Maharashtra and Punjab said quite bluntly and most rightly that, In the Nirbhaya case, strong legal action was taken against the accused. They were all sentenced to death but have not been hanged so far. The legal system loses its impact in such cases. When our criminal justice system becomes weak and ineffective, the public expects strong action. Then even if the action is not strictly legal, people welcome it. We have to fast-track our system, make it more effective.

Senior Congress leader Sanjay Nirupam said, Encounter killing of all 4 accused of # Hydrabad Rape-Case may seem like unlawful but it was the need of the hour. I congratulate # hydrabad police to instill sense of security in the women of our country. # Human Rights activists may not agree but a strong message had to be put out. However, I personally very strongly feel that if they had been made to face trial in court of law and then sent to gallows, the happiness would have been much more. But the excruciatingly glacial pace with which our judicial system functions is certainly a matter of deepest concern for all of us!

It cannot be overlooked that just recently even the Union Law Minister Ravi Shankar Prasad on the solemn occasion of inauguration of a new building of the Rajasthan High Court in Jodhpur made a fervent appeal saying that, I would urge the CJI and other senior judge that now there must be a mechanism to monitor the disposal of these cases so that India's stature as a proud country governed by rule of law must be restored at the earliest. Prasad also assured government funding for it which must be appreciated!

No doubt, Ravi Shankar Prasad has a point when he says that, In the law relating to violence against women, we have already laid down capital punishment and other severe punishment including completion of trial in two months' time. But it also cannot be denied that capital punishment has not been made mandatory in our rape laws even for repeated offenders nor for gang rape on women under twelve years of age. All the discretion bombs in the form of may and providing alternative of life in our rape laws need to be defused promptly if we really want to send a strong and stern message to all rapists that any misadventure by them would culminate in their being lined up for being hanged! Just cosmetic steps meant for public consumption won't do! The fear of swift and strict punishment need to be ingrained in rapists which can be possible only if our rape laws are amended drastically so as to close all escape routes for rapists and gang rapists!

No doubt, Ravi Shankar has a point when he says there were 704 fast track courts for such offences and others. But it also cannot be denied that 15 states and Union Territories have failed to set up fast-track special courts (FTSC) for speedy rape trials, ignoring repeated reminders from the Centre. These states have not responded to the Centre's proposal to start FTSCs to fast-track the trial of sexual assault cases, including those registered under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (Pocso) Act.

It is quite glaring to note that both Telangana and Uttar Pradesh where rape incidents have sparked huge public outrage did not take adequate steps to designate special courts. Telangana constituted its first FTC on December 4 after the rape and murder of the 26-year-old veterinary doctor in Hyderabad. Earlier reminders were sent to the states on five occasions – September 5, October 15, October 22, November 5 and November 20. This is what is most shocking and reflects the callous attitude of the states on such an important issue. This alone explains why senior Supreme Court advocate VV Giri, who assisted the top court in the case resulting in the November order relating to fast track courts for Pocso cases, said the states had abdicated their duty by not setting up FTSCs in a time-bound manner. Giri further added that, One needs a political will to set up FTSCs and not drag the matter. Besides, the state must also appoint a special prosecutor to conduct the trial on behalf of the prosecuting agency. The more the case gets prolonged, chances of tampering by the accused are also high.

Smriti Irani who is Union Minister for Women and Children Development says that, There are talks for enacting a provision of stricter punishment for rapists. The government has already come out with the provision of death penalty. Nothing can be more severe than handing capital punishment (for rapists).

She must read the rape laws enacted in IPC even after the 2018 amendments carefully. Escape routes in the form of discretion bombs are there not just for child rapists but even for repeated offenders. All these escape routes' must be fully closed and discretion bombs must be promptly defused by making death penalty mandatory with no option of life term! Only then will rapists think thousand times before even attempting to commit rape!

However, it is good to learn from Smriti Irani that funds are being utilized for setting up 1023 fast track courts in the country for speedy disposal of rape cases. It is also good to learn from her that a national database of more than 7 lakh offenders found guilty of rape is readied to keep an eye on them. I would rather say that, Why should all these 7 lakh offenders found guilty of rape not be hanged? Why hang just one poor Dhanajoy Chatterjee in 15 years?

It cannot be denied that Smriti Rani rightly said that society should come forward to provide legal aid to rape survivors. She also rightly said that respect for women should begin from families as they are the centres for nurturing moral values. Strict laws alone even though imperative are not enough to check crimes against women! It merits no reiteration that the whole attitude of society must change hugely towards women and girl child and only then can we hope that crime against women will subside to a great extent in coming years!

Sanjeev Sirohi, Advocate,
s/o Col BPS Sirohi, A 82, Defence Enclave,
Sardhana Road, Kankerkhera, Meerut – 250001, Uttar Pradesh.

Comments

There are no comments for this article.
Only authorized users can leave comments. Please sign in first, or register a free account.
Share
Sponsor
About Author
Sanjeev Sirohi Advocate
Member since Apr 20, 2018
Location: Meerut, UP
Following
User not following anyone yet.
You might also like
The general principle, is that a FIR cannot be depended upon a substantive piece of evidence.The article discusses the general priciple, along with exceptions to it.
Victim plays an important role in the criminal justice system but his/her welfare is not given due regard by the state instrumentality. Thus, the role of High Courts or the Supreme Court in our country in affirming and establishing their rights is dwelt in this article.
Can anybody really know what is going inside the heads of criminal lawyers? I mean, yes, we can pick bits of their intelligence during courtroom trials and through the legal documents that they draft.
Terrorism and organized crimes are interrelated in myriad forms. Infact in many illustration terrorism and organized crimes have converged and mutated.
Right to a copy of police report and other documents As per section 207 of CrPC, accused has the right to be furnished with the following in case the proceeding has been initiated on a police report:
In terms of Section 2 of the Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993 hereafter referred to as 'the Act'), "human rights" means the rights relating to life, liberty, equality and dignity of the individual guaranteed under the Constitution
The Oxford dictionary defines police as an official organization whose job is to make people obey the law and to prevent and solve crime
the Supreme Court let off three gang rapists after they claimed a ‘compromise formula’ with the victim and agreed to pay her a fine of Rs 50,000 each for their offence.
benefit those prisoners who are kept in solitary confinement, the Uttarakhand High Court delivered a landmark judgment in the case of State of Uttarakhand v 1. Mehtab s/o Tahir Hassan 2. Sushil @Bhura s/o Gulab Singh Criminal Reference No. 1 of 2014 on April 27, 2018
this article helps you knowing how to become a criminal lawyer
helps you to know adultery and its types
In the landmark case of Manoj Singh Pawar v State of Uttarakhand & others Writ Petition (PIL) No. 156 of 2016 which was delivered on June 18, 2018, the Uttarakhand High Court issued a slew of landmark directions
Scope and ambit of Section 6 of Indian Evidence Act,1872
Victims of Crime Can Seek Cancellation of Bail: MP HC in Mahesh Pahade vs State of MP
State of Orissa v Mahimananda Mishra said clearly and convincingly that the court must not go deep into merits of the matter while considering an application for bail and all that needs to be established from the record is the existence of a prima facie case against the accused.
Yashwant v Maharashtra while the conviction of some police officers involved in a custodial torture which led to the death of a man was upheld, the Apex Court underscored on the need to develop and recognize the concept of democratic policing wherein crime control is not the only end, but the means to achieve this order is also equally important.
20 more people guilty of killing a 60-year-old Dalit man and his physically-challenged daughter. Upheld acquittals of 21 other accused, holding that there was insufficient evidence to establish their guilt. So it was but natural that they had to be acquitted
No person accused of an offence punishable for offences involving commercial quantity shall be released on bail or on his own bond unless
Accident under section 80 under the Indian Penal Code falls under the chapter of general exceptions. This article was made with the objective of keeping in mind the students of law who are nowadays in dire need of material which simplify the law than complicating it.
Nishan Singh v State of Punjab. Has ordered one Nishan Singh Brar, convicted of abduction and rape of a minor victim girl, and his mother Navjot Kaur to pay Rs 90 lakh towards compensation.
Rajesh Sharma v State of UP to regulate the purported gross misuse of Section 498A IPC have been modified just recently in a latest judgment titled Social Action Forum Manav for Manav Adhikar and another v Union of India Ministry of Law and Justice and others.
Kodungallur Film Society vs. Union of India has issued comprehensive guidelines to control vandalism by protesting mobs. Vandalism is vandalism and it cannot be justified under any circumstances. Those who indulge in it and those who instigate it must all be held clearly accountable and made to pay for what they have done most shamefully.
Ram Lal vs. State of Himachal Pradesh If the court is satisfied that if the confession is voluntary, the conviction can be based upon the same. Rule of prudence does not require that each and every circumstance mentioned in the confession must be separately and independently corroborated. Absolutely right There can be no denying it
Joseph Shine case struck down the law of adultery under Section 497. It declared that adultery can be a ground for civil issues including dissolution of marriages but it cannot be a criminal offence. It invalidated the Section 497 of IPC as a violation of Articles 14 and 15 and under Article 21 of the Constitution
Mallikarjun Kodagali (Dead) represented through Legal Representatives v/s Karnataka, Had no hesitation to concede right from the start while underscoring the rights of victims of crime that, The rights of victims of crime is a subject that has, unfortunately, only drawn sporadic attention of Parliament, the judiciary and civil society.
State of Kerala v Rasheed observed that while deciding an application to defer cross examination under Section 231(2) of the Cr.P.C. a balance must be struck between the rights of the accused, and the prerogative of the prosecution to lead evidence. The Apex Court in this landmark judgment also listed out practical guidelines.
Reena Hazarika v State of Assam that a solemn duty is cast on the court in the dispensation of justice to adequately consider the defence of the accused taken under Section 313 CrPC and to either accept or reject the same for reasons specified in writing.
Zulfikar Nasir & Ors v UP has set aside the trial court judgment that had acquitted 16 Provincial Armed Constabulary (PAC) officials in the 1987 Hashimpur mass murder case. The Delhi High Court has convicted all the accused and sentenced them to life imprisonment.
In Babasaheb Maruti Kamble v Maharashtra it was held that the Special Leave Petitions filed in those cases where death sentence is awarded by the courts below, should not be dismissed without giving reasons, at least qua death sentence.
Shambhir & Ors v State upholding the conviction and punishment of over 80 rioters has brought some solace to all those affected people who lost their near and dear ones in the ghastly 1984 anti-Sikh riots which brought disrepute to our country and alienated many Sikhs from the national mainstream
Naman Singh alias Naman Pratap Singh and another vs. UP, Supreme Court held a reading of the FIR reveals that the police has registered the F.I.R on directions of the Sub-Divisional Magistrate which was clearly impermissible in the law.
It has been a long and gruelling wait of 34 long years for the survivors of 1984 anti-Sikh riots to finally see one big leader Sajjan Kumar being sentenced to life term by Delhi High Court
Rajendra Pralhadrao Wasnik v State of Maharashtra held that criminals are also entitled to life of dignity and probability of reformation/rehabilitation to be seriously and earnestly considered before awarding death sentence. It will help us better understand and appreciate the intricacies of law.
Sukhlal v The State of Madhya Pradesh 'life imprisonment is the rule and death penalty is the exception' has laid down clearly that even when a crime is heinous or brutal, it may not still fall under the rarest of rare category.
Deepak v State of Madhya Pradesh in which has served to clarify the entire legal position under Section 319 CrPC, upheld a trial court order under Section 319 of the CrPc summoning accused who were in the past discharged by it ignoring the supplementary charge sheet against them.
It has to be said right at the outset that in a major reprieve for all the political leaders accused of being involved in the Sohrabuddin fake encounter case, in CBI, Mumbai vs Dahyaji Goharji Vanzara
Devi Lal v State of Rajasthan the Supreme Court has dispelled all misconceived notions about suspicion and reiterated that,
Madhya Pradesh v Kalyan Singh has finally set all doubts to rest on the nagging question of whether offences under Section 307 of IPC can be quashed on the basis of settlement between parties.
Dr Dhruvaram Murlidhar Sonar v Maharashtra made it amply clear that if a person had not made the promise to marry with the sole intention to seduce a woman to indulge in sexual acts, such an act would not amount to rape.
Rajesh v State of Haryana conviction under Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code (Abetment of Suicide) is not sustainable on the allegation of harassment without there being any positive action proximate to the time of occurrence on the part of the accused, which led or compelled the person to commit suicide.
Nand Kishore v Madhya Pradesh has commuted to life imprisonment the death sentence which was earlier confirmed by the Madhya Pradesh High Court of a convicted for the rape and murder of an eight-year-old girl.
Raju Jagdish Paswan v. Maharashtra has commuted the death penalty of a man accused of rape and murder of a nine year old girl and sentenced him to 30 years imprisonment without remission.
Swapan Kumar Chatterjee v CBI permitting the application filed by the prosecution for summoning a hand writing expert in a corruption case of which the trial had started in 1985. On expected lines, the Bench accordingly delivered its significant judgment thus laying down the correct proposition of law to be followed always in such cases
Sukhpal Singh v Punjab that the inability of the prosecution to establish motive in a case of circumstantial evidence is not always fatal to the prosecution case. Importance of motive in determining the culpability of the accused but refused to acknowledge it as the sole criteria for not convicting the accused in the absence of motive.
Gagan Kumar v Punjab it is a mandatory legal requirement for Magistrate to specify whether sentences awarded to an accused convicted for two or more offences, would run concurrently or consecutively.
Dnyaneshwar Suresh Borkar v Maharashtra Even poem can help save a death convict from gallows. The Apex Court has in this latest, landmark and laudable judgment commuted the death penalty of a kidnap cum murder convict who was just 22 years of age at the time of occurrence
Himachal Pradesh v Vijay Kumar Supreme court held about acid attack crime that a crime of this nature does not deserve any kind of clemency.
Death Sentence Can Be Imposed Only When Life Imprisonment Appears To Be An Altogether Inappropriate Punishment: SC
S. Sreesanth v. The Board of Control For Cricket In India the Supreme Court set aside a life ban imposed on former Indian cricketer S Sreesanth in connection with the 2013 IPL spot-fixing scandal and asked the BCCI Disciplinary Committee to take a fresh call on the quantum of his punishment under the Anti-Corruption Code.
Adding Additional Accused To Invoke Section 319 CrPC Stronger Evidence Than Mere Probability of Complicity of A Person Required: SC stated in Sugreev Kumar v. State of Punjab
Top