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

Why Only One Dhananjoy Chatterjee Hanged Till Now?

Posted in: Criminal Law
Mon, Dec 9, 19, 09:54, 5 Years ago
star star star star star
5 out of 5 with 1 ratings
comments: 0 - hits: 32823
A rape is a rape and under no circumstances can ever be justified! Even if a woman roams nude or is habituated to sex, this can be no ground to justify rape! Even Supreme Court has time and again reiterated this! Yet it is the single biggest misfortune of India that in last 15 to 16 years, only one poor rapist named Dhananjoy Chatterjee was hanged

Let me begin by first and foremost saying that, A rape is a rape and under no circumstances can ever be justified! Even if a woman roams nude or is habituated to sex, this can be no ground to justify rape! Even Supreme Court has time and again reiterated this! Yet it is the single biggest misfortune of India that in last 15 to 16 years, only one poor rapist named Dhananjoy Chatterjee was hanged for rape cum murder of a Class XI girl and that too on circumstantial evidence alone and still he was not given the benefit of doubt! Why this zero tolerance as shown in Dhananjoy Chatterjee's case not shown in other cases also? Why should we be not ashamed of it?

While lamenting about this, senior and eminent Supreme Court advocate Colin Gonsalves very rightly pointed out that his petition was drafted by prisoners of Tihar jail and we cannot dispute that this was rightly termed as miscarriage of justice! Why in many other similar cases like that of Priyadarshini Mattoo murder case where a law student studying in LLB who was raped and murdered by her senior was the convict not hanged similarly?

Just because the convict was affluent and powerful! This is just one case I am citing. There are many more such cases where we see that the rich and powerful very easily escape death penalty by hiring a battery of eminent and experienced lawyers and escape with far lesser punishment! All this happens right under the nose of the Supreme Court and still we see nothing changes in last so many years! This is what I find most worrying!

What is even more deplorable is that our legal system proceeds on an excruciatingly glacial pace for which no one else but our lawmakers are directly responsible! Who are these lawmakers? Those who are elected to Parliament and 45% of them are facing criminal cases including that of rape case! Why should these lawmakers not be barred from entering Parliament until they are finally exonerated not by just lower court but by the top court? How can we expect such lawmakers to make tough laws?

This alone explains why we have all this review petition, curative petition, mercy petition etc which ensures that cases are not decided in time and by the time cases are decided finally the family of victims lose all hope and break down completely! Should we be proud of this? Why there is no mandatory death penalty for rape cases? Who is protecting them?

The Vice President M Venkaiah Naidu very rightly said that, What happens even after punishment is given (to convicts). We all are witness...appeal, mercy (petition)... can anybody think of having mercy on such people? This kind of violation of dignity of women cannot go on unchallenged. What is required is not a new bill; what is required is political will, administrative skill and then change of mindset and then go for the kill of the social evil. He has very rightly expressed his utmost unhappiness on the niggardly and glacial pace with which our justice system moves most excruciatingly which completely destroys the morale of the parents and relatives of victims which under no circumstances can ever be justified by anyone!

The Vice President has very rightly and eruditely suggested a rethink on the practice of allowing convicts in such heinous crimes to go in for mercy appeals because the death sentence of convicts in the 2012 Nirbhaya case, which saw major protests and tougher legislation, were still to be carried out. He also very rightly suggested that photographs of those guilty of crimes against women should be published to instill social stigma and fear in them!

Police encounters in which undertrials are killed cannot be justified. But we saw how just recently in early morning hours of December 6, 2019 when the police killed all the four rape accused in Hyderabad gangrape-cum-murder, there was a national rejoicing as we saw for ourselves in different newschannels and even MPs and Chief Ministers as well as former Chief Ministers welcomed this and a huge crowd of people started throwing flowers on those policemen who killed them! This is mainly because we rarely see rapist being hanged and our legal system proceeds so slowly that many people now have lost faith in the capability of our judicial system to deliver justice in time! This is most dangerous for our country and for this not just Supreme Court but even Parliament which comprises of our lawmakers and many of whom are themselves facing serious crime charges must introspect honestly and make tough laws in this regard including barring all those MPs who are under the scanner!

  • Why should a civilized society have any soft corner for such dreaded goons who indulge in gangrape?
  • Why do our courts display leniency towards such dastardly acts of crime and why mandatory death penalty is not awarded to such dreaded goons?
  • Why those committing such dastardly acts are not awarded mandatory death penalty in all such cases where either a child is raped or gang rape is omitted accompanied with murder?
  • Why in our IPC punishment for gangrape is classified according to age?
  • Why are minors who are less than 18 years of age allowed to get away most easily by just spending 3 years at the most in a child reform house?
  • Why should any form of leniency be shown even for minors who brutally vandalise the very dignity and wellbeing of a female without any fault of her?
  • Why should those rapists who know how to gangrape be let off just by citing their age factor?
  • How can Centre justify it?
  • How can Parliament justify it?
  • How can any Court justify it?
  • Why are rapists released for some time on bail?
  • Why the life and safety of victim is not cared for by the police?

Why do we see that rapists after coming out of the jail many times corner the girl and then killed her by either burning her as we saw most recently in Unaao in UP where the women was raped in March and then just recently while she was going to a court in Rai Bareli in a rape case was most brutally attacked by 5 men who had earlier raped her and was burnt 90 percent? Still our Parliament will keep dwelling on whether to award death penalty to such rapists or not!

Why women does not feel safe anywhere in India? It is because our politicians, Judges, lawmakers feel most happy and proud to note that in last 15 to 16 years just one poor Dhananjoy Chatterjee is hanged for rape cum murder and do just nothing to ensure that others against whom there is strong evidence also unlike Dhananjoy's case where evidence was just circumstantial are hanged similarly! Should we be proud of this and does it enhance the reputation of our country in the world?

Under the amended law for rape, no discretion bomb in the form of may should be left which has been mostly abused in favour of the rape accused and the punishment should only be death and nothing but death so that all those who rape are promptly hanged and not once in 15 or 16 years as we saw in case of Dhananjoy Chatterjee!

There should be no life term, no twenty years but only death for gang rape. It is most unfortunate that even under the 2018 amended Section 376D of IPC which prescribes punishment for gang rape we see that the punishment is not less than twenty years but which may extend to life! Why may extend to life? Why so much of leniency that even for gang rape we see that punishment starts from twenty years but extends only to life and here too discretionary power rests with Judge which is shameful and what is most shameful is that there is no mention of death penalty even here leave alone making it mandatory? This must change now!

Why different punishment prescribed for gang rape on woman under 16 years of age as prescribed in Section 376DA and that on woman under 12 years of age as prescribed under Section 376DB of IPC? Why only life imprisonment under Section 376DA and not death? Why option of life and death in Section 376DB of IPC?

Why even for repeated offenders there is no mandatory death penalty and why the option of life term is added simultaneously in Section 376E of IPC? All these escape routes must be closed now forever so that rapists are never able to take advantage of the loopholes in our legal system anymore now! But are our politicians, lawmakers and Centre ready to do this or will they be happy with just face saving exercise and lip service? Only time will tell!

The past track record in cases like Nirbhaya and many others are not very inspiring but they can still be rectified! The ball is in court of Centre, lawmakers and Parliament for it is they who enact the law and it is they who ensure that rapists in Nirbhaya case like many others are not hanged even after being convicted by the Supreme Court and even after their review petition gets rejected by Supreme Court as they just sit on mercy petition and don't decide it soon as we saw in case of killers of former PM late Rajiv Gandhi whose mercy petition kept pending for decades! Should we be proud of this?

Must act now without fail or else our democratic system will crumble and if gang hanging is not done it is people who will then do mob hanging like we are seeing also in many cases! No more excuses! No castration, no jail term, no life term and no minor excuse but only death as they deserve to be hanged at the earliest and killed like mosquitoes! No mercy for them, no review for them and no other escape route for them! Only death!

Why rape cases are not decided within few days or a month? Why sentence is not handed out promptly? Why cases keep pending for decades first in lower courts, then in high court and finally in Supreme Court?

Why can't this be corrected by our lawmakers by amending law accordingly and setting a fixed time limit for deciding rape cases? Why is time limit not set for deciding review petition? Why is review and curative petition not abolished in heinous crimes like rape and terror?

Why mercy petition is not decided in few days or why should it not be abolished altogether for rape and terror cases? Why only the rights of the accused takes precedence over the rights of the victim? Why even our lawmakers prefer to look the other way on this all important issue as we have been seeing since last 72 years?

It is high time and now concrete steps must be taken on ground to ensure that our penal laws are amended and the most strictest punishment of death penalty be imposed uniformly on all those indulging in gang rape and there should be no mercy petition facility for such dreaded goons who display the worst form of violence against women whom we all worship in one form or the other like Durga, Gauri, Kali etc or in form of our mother and sister!

Can gangrape of any female accompanied with murder be justified under any circumstances? Can any punishment less than death penalty be ever justified in such cases of heinous crimes? If still Centre says Yes then it must immediately abolish death penalty for all types of crimes for it has no right to be on our penal laws if it cannot be awarded to those who indulge in gangrape or even rape accompanied with murder!

What the hell is Centre doing? How long will it keep inviting views from all on this? How long will it shy away from amending our penal laws to make it mandatory for death penalty to be imposed in all cases of rape or gangrape accompanied with murder? How long will female keep getting raped, gangraped and murdered?

Needless to say, this alone explains that why we are even below Pakistan and Bangladesh when it comes to happiness index! No time is spared to hang those who commit heinous crimes in Pakistan and Bangladesh. But see what is happening in our country!

Those accused in Nirbhaya gangrape cum murder case have not even been hanged till now seven years later even though Supreme Court has awarded them death penalty and their review petition have also been rejected! They are now availing the facility of mercy petition for which no definite time limit is specified for deciding it due to which they remain pending for many years!

  • How can all this be justified by anyone on any ground whatsoever?
  • Why is gang rape in India not accompanied with gang hanging?
  • Why should they be allowed to escape on any ground whatsoever?
  • Why should they be allowed to escape punishment citing age as a reason?
  • What message are we sending by exempting minors from strictest punishment?

The biggest treachery that our politicians have done with our Constitution is to ensure that heinous crimes like gang rape or rape accompanied with murder, terror crimes funded by foreign countries are not punished with mandatory death penalty and also by not abolishing 'mercy petition' privilege for such dreaded goons and terrorists! Why our judicial and legal system saves rapists and more crucially gang rapists from being hanged? How many gang rapists have been hanged till now since 1947 till 2019? We all know the answer! We all must be terribly ashamed of it.

All Supreme Court Judges and all senior and eminent lawyers whom I would term legal giants like Soli J Sorabjee, Harish Salve, Kapil Sibal, Abhishek Manu Singhvi among others must introspect on this and give their expert advice to enhance the reputation of judiciary in the eyes of people and restore the waning confidence among the people which is a matter of utmost concern for all of us! We just cannot now afford to sit idle anymore!

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