Abolish Death Penalty India: Confirmation Case to be heard on video conferencing of accused

Thursday, October 25, 2012

Confirmation Case to be heard on video conferencing of accused

A division bench of the Bombay High Court is about to begin the hearing the confirmation case wherein the Sessions Court had given death sentence to Nihal Raish Sheikh (30) and Rafique Mohammad Unni Jan Sayyed (27) for the offence of kidnapping and murder. On 23.10.2012 the Court passed an order asking the home department to make arrangements for video conferencing in the court as the Accused No.1 could not attend the court. The doctor from Arthur Road Jail had advised the accused no.1 to be not moved out of jail due to his health conditions. This is the third case after the case of Kasab and the Gateway of India blast case that the confirmation case would be held on video conferencing. The hearing of the case is likely to start on 29.10.2012. Confirmation Case No. 2 of 2011 along with Appeal No. 764 of 2012.

1 comment:

Sulakhe'sMay 6, 2014 at 5:26 AM
That's a very good solution for good protection and for comfortable communication from their own places. Implementing Video Conferencing Software as a technology for better collaboration and for the growth and development of any business or organization is a key benefit which makes a easy work compared to the past.
ReplyDelete
Replies

Add comment

The Death Penalty Scenario in India

India is one of 193 countries that retains the death penalty. Some judges have delivered landmark verdicts upholding the rights of death row prisoners, while debates continue advocating abolition or reform of sentencing policies. The Indian government remains committed to retention, asserting executions occur only in “rarest of rare” cases. The death penalty applies to crimes including murder, kidnapping, terrorism, desertion, inducement to suicide of a minor or mentally-retarded person, and in certain cases of rape. Outrage over child rape and murder has intensified these discussions. After an unofficial eight-year moratorium, the government executed Ajmal Kasab (Mumbai attacks) in 2012 and Afzal Guru (Parliament attack) in 2013, both covertly and immediately after mercy petitions were rejected. Prior to this, Dhananjoy Chatterjee was executed in 2004 after 13 years on death row. Following these, many mercy petitions have been rejected, creating fear among death row convicts. Courts continue to hand down death sentences at an increasing rate. Empirical studies highlight the plight of death row prisoners. The India Exclusion Report 2017-18 found fair trial rights largely denied, with convicts often marginalized by caste, religion, poverty, and education. The Death Penalty Research Project (2015) documented socio-economic profiles and experiences of death row prisoners. Dr. Reena Mary George’s studies (2014, 2009) emphasized poverty, social exclusion, and dignity as central to death row experiences, and examined the human rights impact of the penalty. According to the National Crime Records Bureau 2015, 101 prisoners were on death row, with many sentences commuted to life. The “rarest of rare” doctrine introduced by the Supreme Court in the 1980s has not substantially limited death sentences, which have increased over the decades. Justice Joseph (2018) reaffirmed the Bachan Singh judgment but urged restriction of the death penalty to only those cases meeting its criteria. While updating the blog and conducting my own empirical studies, I observed the heinous nature of the crimes that were committed and thought about the families, about their loss, about the victims who for no fault of their own died. If I lost my relative or a dear friend, would I still oppose death penalty and would I still advocate to abolish the death sentence? Having worked in the criminal justice system and also having the seen the other side, where often it is the marginalized, vulnerable and oppressed who are on death row makes me want to advocate for abolition of this punishment. Victims should definitely get justice for their loss, for their pain. No one should escape the rule of law. As long as humanity exists; crime will exist. Should we not re-consider our sentencing policies? Reena Mary George