Dhananjay Mahapatra,TNN | Apr 20, 2013
NEW DELHI: Is life sentence, which generally translates to 14 years in prison, a good alternative to death penalty in heinous and gruesome murders which fall just short of being categorized 'rarest of rare" to invite the extreme punishment?
This question from the Supreme Court related to those cases where trial courts impose death penalty but higher courts, after scrutinizing the evidence afresh, find that the case falls just short of being bracketed under 'rarest of rare' category not warranting award of capital punishment.
A bench of Justices P Sathasivam and M Y Eqbal was confronted with this question in the case where one Sahib Hussain was found guilty of murdering five persons and was awarded death penalty by a Rajasthan court. The high court commuted the death penalty to life imprisonment with a rider that it would not be less than 20 years in prison.
Justice Sathasivam, writing the judgment for the bench, upheld the 20-year sentence but found that in a recent judgment (Sangeet vs Haryana), the SC had criticized award of sentences ranging between 20 years and 35 years in gruesome murder cases which fell outside the purview of 'rarest of rare' tag by a whisker.
In that judgment, the apex court had said it was impermissible for courts to limit the power of the government to grant parole or remission to convicts sentenced to life. In most cases of life imprisonment, convicts, on showing good conduct, get entitled to remission and are let out after spending 14 years in jail.
The bench of Justices Sathasivam and Eqbal said the judgment criticizing higher courts for awarding sentences ranging between 20 years and 35 years as an alternative to death penalty was unwarranted, given the fact that state governments had granted remission without adequate reasons or even on flimsy grounds.
"It is clear that since more than a decade, in many cases, whenever death sentence has been commuted to life imprisonment where the offence alleged is serious in nature, while awarding life imprisonment, this court reiterated minimum years of imprisonment of 20 years or 25 years or 30 years or 35 years, mentioning thereby, if the appropriate government wants to give remission, the same has to be considered only after the expiry of the said period," the bench said.
The bench supported its reasoning with the Swami Shradhananda judgment, in which the apex court in 2008 had said, "When an appellant comes to this court carrying a death sentence awarded by the trial court and confirmed by the high court, this court may find that the case just falls short of the rarest of rare category and may feel somewhat reluctant in endorsing the death sentence.
"But at the same time, having regard to the nature of the crime, the court may strongly feel that a sentence of life imprisonment subject to remission normally works out to a term of 14 years and would be grossly inadequate."
It had further said, "What then should the court do? If the court's option is limited only to two punishments, one a sentence of imprisonment, for all intents and purposes of not more than 14 years, and the other death, the court may feel tempted to find itself nudged into endorsing the death penalty. Such a course would be disastrous.
"A far more just, reasonable and proper course would be to expand the options and to take over what, as a matter of fact, lawfully belongs to the court, that is the vast hiatus between 14 years' imprisonment and death. It needs to be emphasized that the court would take recourse to the expanded option primarily because in the facts of the case, the sentence of 14 years imprisonment would amount to no punishment at all." The court had ordered that Shradhananda would not be released from jail.
Source : http://m.timesofindia.com/india/Is-14-years-imprisonment-an-alternative-to-death-penalty-SC-asks/articleshow/19642922.cms
Sunday, April 21, 2013
Friday, April 19, 2013
German Bakery blast convict gets death for 'heinous terrorist act'
Atikh Rashid , Chandan Haygunde : Pune, Fri Apr 19 2013, 03:34 hrs
Additional Sessions Judge N P Dhote on Thursday awarded the death
penalty to Mirza Himayat Inayat Baig (33), who was convicted earlier
this week for involvement in the German Bakery bombing of February 13,
2010, which killed 17 and wounded 64."From the proven circumstances, the act falls under the 'rarest of
the rare' case. In the wake of proven facts and taking into
consideration the observations made by the apex court... the only
punishment the accused deserves is the death penalty," the court said.
The judge also awarded several prison terms to Baig for
convictions under various sections of the Indian Penal Code, Unlawful
Activities (Prevention) Act and Explosive Substances Act.
The judge observed that evidence and testimonies put forth by the prosecution had proved beyond doubt that the accused had conspired to bomb the bakery, and participated in the execution of this "heinous terrorist act"."...The accused is greatly influenced by the ideology of terrorism and looking at his calculated moves in giving effect to the conspiracy and terrorism act, I am of the considered view that there are no chances of his reformation and that he is a threat to society," the judgment said.
Baig has the right to appeal in the high court. "The death penalty is applicable only after confirmation from the High Court," said the judgment.
Baig's lawyer A Rahman pleaded for leniency on the grounds of his young age, poor family background and the fact that he was an educated person with BA and B.Ed degrees."He (Baig) is only accused of accompanying Yasin Bhatkal, who allegedly planted the bomb... None of the six other accused... have been arrested. There is no evidence... that proves Baig is a member of Indian Mujahideen or LeT," Rahman said. He also argued that the Maharashtra ATS had failed to visit the Sri Lankan capital Colombo, where the conspiracy was allegedly hatched in March 2008.Rahman cited seven Supreme Court judgments arguing that even in cases of brutal murders in which the accused was directly involved, the court has decided against awarding the death penalty.
Special public prosecutor Raja Thakre argued that Baig might have been a teacher, but the lessons he taught to youths were those of jehad and terrorism. Age, Thakre said, could not be a ground for leniency: Yakub Memon who got death for the 1993 Bombay blasts was only 33 at the time of the attacks. Even Ajmal Kasab, who was hanged for 26/11, was young, Thakre said."Recovery of RDX from the accused has been proved in this court. Evidence shows the accused collected and possessed forged documents of fake identity, fake card of being handicapped... It should be considered that the monster of terror has affected many countries. The recent terror strikes at Bangalore and Boston should be kept in mind. The accused has been held guilty of an act of terror, hence death penalty should be awarded," Thakre said.
Source: http://www.indianexpress.com/news/german-bakery-blast-convict-gets-death-for-heinous-terrorist-act/1104695/0 [accessed on 19th April 2013]
The judge observed that evidence and testimonies put forth by the prosecution had proved beyond doubt that the accused had conspired to bomb the bakery, and participated in the execution of this "heinous terrorist act"."...The accused is greatly influenced by the ideology of terrorism and looking at his calculated moves in giving effect to the conspiracy and terrorism act, I am of the considered view that there are no chances of his reformation and that he is a threat to society," the judgment said.
Baig has the right to appeal in the high court. "The death penalty is applicable only after confirmation from the High Court," said the judgment.
Baig's lawyer A Rahman pleaded for leniency on the grounds of his young age, poor family background and the fact that he was an educated person with BA and B.Ed degrees."He (Baig) is only accused of accompanying Yasin Bhatkal, who allegedly planted the bomb... None of the six other accused... have been arrested. There is no evidence... that proves Baig is a member of Indian Mujahideen or LeT," Rahman said. He also argued that the Maharashtra ATS had failed to visit the Sri Lankan capital Colombo, where the conspiracy was allegedly hatched in March 2008.Rahman cited seven Supreme Court judgments arguing that even in cases of brutal murders in which the accused was directly involved, the court has decided against awarding the death penalty.
Special public prosecutor Raja Thakre argued that Baig might have been a teacher, but the lessons he taught to youths were those of jehad and terrorism. Age, Thakre said, could not be a ground for leniency: Yakub Memon who got death for the 1993 Bombay blasts was only 33 at the time of the attacks. Even Ajmal Kasab, who was hanged for 26/11, was young, Thakre said."Recovery of RDX from the accused has been proved in this court. Evidence shows the accused collected and possessed forged documents of fake identity, fake card of being handicapped... It should be considered that the monster of terror has affected many countries. The recent terror strikes at Bangalore and Boston should be kept in mind. The accused has been held guilty of an act of terror, hence death penalty should be awarded," Thakre said.
Source: http://www.indianexpress.com/news/german-bakery-blast-convict-gets-death-for-heinous-terrorist-act/1104695/0 [accessed on 19th April 2013]
Blast killed 17 innocent people, I'm the 18th, weeping Himayat Baig tells court
Atikh Rashid , SushantKulkarni : Pune, Fri Apr 19 2013, 08:13 hrs
Himayat Baig broke down in court as he told the judge that he had
nothing to do with the bombing, and that the judgment had punished an
innocent man. Soon after he was given the death sentence, Baig fainted
while being escorted to the custody room.
"Judge sahab, mera iss case se kucch lena dena nahi hai," Baig, who
the Maharashtra ATS says is the Lashkar commander in the state, told
Additional Sessions Judge N P Dhote after the judge gave him time to
have his say before announcing the punishment."I come from a poor family... I wanted to do something for my
community, which is backward in every way. I had come to Pune on January
31, 2010 for a rally seeking reservations for Muslims. I was not on the
run (as the ATS says). We knew that a lot of innocent youths had been
arrested. I was afraid that the same would happen to me, hence I stayed
at home..."
At this point, the judge told him to briefly present his argument on the quantum of punishment. Baig then started to read from a four-page handwritten note in Marathi.
"I am a person who believes in Allah. He knows that I would never be part of a heinous crime like this. I have full faith in the judiciary which believes in the principle that '100 criminals may be allowed to go free but not even one innocent person should be punished..." He broke down, and his speech then became incomprehensible.
On recovering somewhat, Baig continued, "In the German Bakery blast 17 innocent people were killed. Now one more innocent person is being victimised. I am the 18th victim of the blast. To render justice to the victims of the blast it would be inappropriate to punish another innocent person.
"I haven't seen explosives in my entire life. I haven't touched RDX once. This is a conspiracy against me by ATS chief Rakesh Maria, (investigating officer) Vinod Satav... On September 7, I was produced in court for the first time. After that, Vinod Satav took me into his cabin..."
At this point, the court interrupted Baig and asked him to speak only on the sentence.
Baig continued: "I am a simple teacher... I can cite several things which have gone unexplained. Shall I put them in front of you?"
Dhote then told Baig that he would have the chance to appeal against the conviction.
At this point, the judge told him to briefly present his argument on the quantum of punishment. Baig then started to read from a four-page handwritten note in Marathi.
"I am a person who believes in Allah. He knows that I would never be part of a heinous crime like this. I have full faith in the judiciary which believes in the principle that '100 criminals may be allowed to go free but not even one innocent person should be punished..." He broke down, and his speech then became incomprehensible.
On recovering somewhat, Baig continued, "In the German Bakery blast 17 innocent people were killed. Now one more innocent person is being victimised. I am the 18th victim of the blast. To render justice to the victims of the blast it would be inappropriate to punish another innocent person.
"I haven't seen explosives in my entire life. I haven't touched RDX once. This is a conspiracy against me by ATS chief Rakesh Maria, (investigating officer) Vinod Satav... On September 7, I was produced in court for the first time. After that, Vinod Satav took me into his cabin..."
At this point, the court interrupted Baig and asked him to speak only on the sentence.
Baig continued: "I am a simple teacher... I can cite several things which have gone unexplained. Shall I put them in front of you?"
Dhote then told Baig that he would have the chance to appeal against the conviction.
Source: http://www.indianexpress.com/news/sc-stays-execution-of-8-death-row-convicts/1099134/ [accessed on 19th April 2013]
Death Penalty in India: “One hardly finds a rich or affluent person going to the gallows”
17 April 2013 Amnesty International
In November 2012, Ajmal Kasab, the lone surviving gunman from the 2008 Mumbai attacks, was hanged in the country’s first execution in more than eight years. Three months later, Afzal Guru was executed after his clemency petition was rejected by the President; Guru had been convicted in 2005 of being involved in the 2001 attack on Parliament.
More recently, the government has expanded the scope of the death penalty by amending laws to provide for this punishment in certain cases of rape.
The Supreme Court last week also rejected an appeal against the decision by the President to reject Devender Pal Singh’s mercy petition. In a trial that has raised serious fair trial concerns, Devender Pal Singh was found guilty of planning an explosion that killed nine people in 1993. His sentence was confirmed by the Supreme Court in 2002 and he has been on death row since.
The recent decision of the Supreme Court is likely to affect at least 17 more prisoners who are asking for commutation of their death sentences on the grounds of delay in the disposal of their mercy petitions by the President.
Justice A. P. Shah, a former Chief Justice of the Delhi High Court, is one of the most outspoken opponents of capital punishment in the country. He shared his views on the death penalty in this interview with Amnesty International.
What is the state of the death penalty in India?
India has carried out only very few executions since the 1990s. However, the brutal gang rape of a 23-year old woman in Delhi last year intensified public calls for the imposition of the death penalty.
Why should India abolish the death penalty?
Whether an accused is sentenced to death or not is an arbitrary matter and depends on a number of factors, ranging from the competence of the legal representation to the interest of the central government in a particular case and the personal predilections of the judges.
It is beyond any shred of doubt that in India, it is the judges’ subjective discretion that eventually decides the fate of an accused.
Also, confessions and witness testimonies play a more vital role in India than in many other countries, given that forensic and other scientific evidence are not so frequently adopted here.
Most death sentences are awarded on circumstantial evidence alone. Even the use of professionally trained witnesses by the police is common.
Why do you say the death penalty is discriminatory?
In India, it is largely cases involving the poor and the down-trodden - who are the victims of class-bias - which result in an imposition of a death penalty. Here one hardly finds a rich or affluent person going to the gallows.
Therefore, it is apparent that the death penalty, as it is used now, is discriminatory. It strikes mostly against the disadvantaged sections of society, showing its arbitrary and capricious nature - thus rendering it unconstitutional.
You have expressed concerns about the execution of Afzal Guru, who was convicted of being involved in 2001 attack on Parliament in Delhi
Several disturbing trends emerge from his execution, which must be highlighted.
For example, the rejection of his clemency petition by the President on 3 February 2013 was kept a secret and was not communicated to his family. Afzal Guru was executed within a week without his family being informed and his body was buried secretly. There are also serious doubts about the quality of evidence and whether he was adequately represented legally during his trial.
What’s the future of the death penalty in India?
The global trend is increasingly and overwhelmingly in favour of abolition.
We would be deluding ourselves if we were to believe that the execution of a few persons sentenced to death will provide a solution to the unacceptably high rates of crime. In reality, capital punishment does not have any deterrent effect.
Justice A. P. Shah is one of 14 retired judges who last year called on the Indian President to commute 13 death sentences that, they maintain, were imposed in a manner inconsistent with the law.
Source : http://www.amnesty.org/en/news/death-penalty-india-one-hardly-finds-rich-or-affluent-person-going-gallows-2013-04-17
In November 2012, Ajmal Kasab, the lone surviving gunman from the 2008 Mumbai attacks, was hanged in the country’s first execution in more than eight years. Three months later, Afzal Guru was executed after his clemency petition was rejected by the President; Guru had been convicted in 2005 of being involved in the 2001 attack on Parliament.
More recently, the government has expanded the scope of the death penalty by amending laws to provide for this punishment in certain cases of rape.
The Supreme Court last week also rejected an appeal against the decision by the President to reject Devender Pal Singh’s mercy petition. In a trial that has raised serious fair trial concerns, Devender Pal Singh was found guilty of planning an explosion that killed nine people in 1993. His sentence was confirmed by the Supreme Court in 2002 and he has been on death row since.
The recent decision of the Supreme Court is likely to affect at least 17 more prisoners who are asking for commutation of their death sentences on the grounds of delay in the disposal of their mercy petitions by the President.
Justice A. P. Shah, a former Chief Justice of the Delhi High Court, is one of the most outspoken opponents of capital punishment in the country. He shared his views on the death penalty in this interview with Amnesty International.
What is the state of the death penalty in India?
India has carried out only very few executions since the 1990s. However, the brutal gang rape of a 23-year old woman in Delhi last year intensified public calls for the imposition of the death penalty.
Why should India abolish the death penalty?
Whether an accused is sentenced to death or not is an arbitrary matter and depends on a number of factors, ranging from the competence of the legal representation to the interest of the central government in a particular case and the personal predilections of the judges.
It is beyond any shred of doubt that in India, it is the judges’ subjective discretion that eventually decides the fate of an accused.
Also, confessions and witness testimonies play a more vital role in India than in many other countries, given that forensic and other scientific evidence are not so frequently adopted here.
Most death sentences are awarded on circumstantial evidence alone. Even the use of professionally trained witnesses by the police is common.
Why do you say the death penalty is discriminatory?
In India, it is largely cases involving the poor and the down-trodden - who are the victims of class-bias - which result in an imposition of a death penalty. Here one hardly finds a rich or affluent person going to the gallows.
Therefore, it is apparent that the death penalty, as it is used now, is discriminatory. It strikes mostly against the disadvantaged sections of society, showing its arbitrary and capricious nature - thus rendering it unconstitutional.
You have expressed concerns about the execution of Afzal Guru, who was convicted of being involved in 2001 attack on Parliament in Delhi
Several disturbing trends emerge from his execution, which must be highlighted.
For example, the rejection of his clemency petition by the President on 3 February 2013 was kept a secret and was not communicated to his family. Afzal Guru was executed within a week without his family being informed and his body was buried secretly. There are also serious doubts about the quality of evidence and whether he was adequately represented legally during his trial.
What’s the future of the death penalty in India?
The global trend is increasingly and overwhelmingly in favour of abolition.
We would be deluding ourselves if we were to believe that the execution of a few persons sentenced to death will provide a solution to the unacceptably high rates of crime. In reality, capital punishment does not have any deterrent effect.
Justice A. P. Shah is one of 14 retired judges who last year called on the Indian President to commute 13 death sentences that, they maintain, were imposed in a manner inconsistent with the law.
Source : http://www.amnesty.org/en/news/death-penalty-india-one-hardly-finds-rich-or-affluent-person-going-gallows-2013-04-17
Thursday, April 18, 2013
Two given death sentence in Bihar
16 April 2013 Press Trust of India DARBHANGA, 16 APRIL: A district court today sentenced two persons to death for killing a petrol pump owner and two others during a robbery in Bihar's Darbhanga district two years ago.
Additional District and Sessions Court judge SP Pandey also fined the convicts Rs 10,000 each.
The court acquitted one person for lack of evidence while another is absconding.
Another accused is facing trial in a juvenile court.
Three persons, including the owner of the petrol pump, were shot dead when they resisted a robbery in 27 January, 2011 at Nehra village under Manigachi police station area.
Source : http://www.thestatesman.net/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=452360&catid=36
Additional District and Sessions Court judge SP Pandey also fined the convicts Rs 10,000 each.
The court acquitted one person for lack of evidence while another is absconding.
Another accused is facing trial in a juvenile court.
Three persons, including the owner of the petrol pump, were shot dead when they resisted a robbery in 27 January, 2011 at Nehra village under Manigachi police station area.
Source : http://www.thestatesman.net/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=452360&catid=36
Tantrik Gets Death Penalty for Sacrificing Boy
APR 15, 2013 Chhattisgarh: A local court today awarded the death sentence to a tantrik for killing an 11-year-old boy as sacrifice to a deity in Raigarh district of Chhattisgarh.
"The additional district and sessions judge (II class) Ashok Kumar Sahu found the occultist Dilip Rathiya (32) guilty of the crime and pronounced the judgement," prosecution lawyer Anil Kumar Shrivastava told PTI.
"The court has also slapped fine of Rs 15,000 on the convict," he added.
While pronouncing the verdict, the court observed that Rathiya deserved severe punishment for the heinous crime.
According to Shrivastava, on the intervening night of February 5 and 6, 2012, the victim named Praveen, a native of Barpali village under Gharghoda police station limits, was visiting a fair along with his relatives on the occasion of Saraswati puja.
Rathiya found the boy there, took him to his house and killed him by slitting his throat as sacrifice to a goddess.
The convict later buried the boy's head in the courtyard of his house, where he was performing the rituals, while the body was dumped in a nearby jungle.
When the child did not come back home, his family members lodged an FIR on February 6, 2012.
Rathiya was arrested during police investigation and the child's body later exhumed.
Source : http://m.outlookindia.com/story.aspx?sid=1&aid=795487
"The additional district and sessions judge (II class) Ashok Kumar Sahu found the occultist Dilip Rathiya (32) guilty of the crime and pronounced the judgement," prosecution lawyer Anil Kumar Shrivastava told PTI.
"The court has also slapped fine of Rs 15,000 on the convict," he added.
While pronouncing the verdict, the court observed that Rathiya deserved severe punishment for the heinous crime.
According to Shrivastava, on the intervening night of February 5 and 6, 2012, the victim named Praveen, a native of Barpali village under Gharghoda police station limits, was visiting a fair along with his relatives on the occasion of Saraswati puja.
Rathiya found the boy there, took him to his house and killed him by slitting his throat as sacrifice to a goddess.
The convict later buried the boy's head in the courtyard of his house, where he was performing the rituals, while the body was dumped in a nearby jungle.
When the child did not come back home, his family members lodged an FIR on February 6, 2012.
Rathiya was arrested during police investigation and the child's body later exhumed.
Source : http://m.outlookindia.com/story.aspx?sid=1&aid=795487
Rape convict Dharampal not to be hanged till may 6
Express news service : Chandigarh | Wed Apr 10 2013 The Punjab and Haryana High Court on Wednesday extended stay on the execution of rape-murder convict Dharampal till May 6. He was to be hanged on April 15.
Stating that he was already acquitted by the High Court in the rape case on the basis of which he was given death sentence by the Supreme Court, Dharampal today demanded commutation of his death sentence.
In an interim relief for Dharampal, the High Court on April 7 had stayed his execution till April 10. This came a day after Haryana DGP (Prison) Sharad Kumar said that Dharampal would be executed on April 15 in Ambala jail, where he has been shifted from Rohtak.
Though jail authorities had said that Dharampal would be hanged on April 15, apprehending an early hanging, his counsel Advocate Navkiran Singh had moved the high court. Saturday being a holiday, a special request was made before the Chief Justice, who asked two high court judges to hold a special division bench.
During the hearing of the case, Singh had referred to a Supreme Court judgment, which had held that a condemned prisoner has the right to demand commutation of his death sentence to life imprisonment if there has been a substantial delay in adjudication of his mercy petition.
Singh had added that if the competent authority, the President, causes delay in deciding the mercy petition of a convict, the latter should not be harassed further and should be given life imprisonment. The delay, he had added, is counted from the day the Supreme Court dismisses the appeal of a convict and orders his hanging. In Dharampal’s case, his hanging was upheld 14 years ago.
Following this, the court had asked the DGP (Prisons) to respond to Dharampal’s petition by April 10.
In 1991, Dharampal was sentenced to 10-year imprisonment for raping a girl in Sonepat. After his release on parole in 1993, Dharampal along with his brother, Nirmal, murdered the girl, her father, mother and two brothers when they were sleeping at their house.
Dharmapal and Nirmal were sentenced to death by a Sessions Court on May 5, 1997 and it was retained by the Punjab and Haryana High Court on September 29, 1998. However, the Supreme Court converted Nirmal’s death penalty to life imprisonment but Dharampal’s death sentence was retained.
His mercy petition was rejected by the Union Home Minister in 2000. Later, Dharampal filed a mercy plea to the President in 2005, which was rejected after about eight years.
Navkiran had also referred to a case filed by terrorist Devinder Pal Singh Bhullar, who had moved the Supreme Court demanding that his death sentence be converted to life since there has been delay in adjudication of his mercy petition. The case stands reserved for final orders by the Supreme Court.
Source : http://m.indianexpress.com/news/rape-convict-dharampal-not-to-be-hanged-till-may-6/1100296/
Stating that he was already acquitted by the High Court in the rape case on the basis of which he was given death sentence by the Supreme Court, Dharampal today demanded commutation of his death sentence.
In an interim relief for Dharampal, the High Court on April 7 had stayed his execution till April 10. This came a day after Haryana DGP (Prison) Sharad Kumar said that Dharampal would be executed on April 15 in Ambala jail, where he has been shifted from Rohtak.
Though jail authorities had said that Dharampal would be hanged on April 15, apprehending an early hanging, his counsel Advocate Navkiran Singh had moved the high court. Saturday being a holiday, a special request was made before the Chief Justice, who asked two high court judges to hold a special division bench.
During the hearing of the case, Singh had referred to a Supreme Court judgment, which had held that a condemned prisoner has the right to demand commutation of his death sentence to life imprisonment if there has been a substantial delay in adjudication of his mercy petition.
Singh had added that if the competent authority, the President, causes delay in deciding the mercy petition of a convict, the latter should not be harassed further and should be given life imprisonment. The delay, he had added, is counted from the day the Supreme Court dismisses the appeal of a convict and orders his hanging. In Dharampal’s case, his hanging was upheld 14 years ago.
Following this, the court had asked the DGP (Prisons) to respond to Dharampal’s petition by April 10.
In 1991, Dharampal was sentenced to 10-year imprisonment for raping a girl in Sonepat. After his release on parole in 1993, Dharampal along with his brother, Nirmal, murdered the girl, her father, mother and two brothers when they were sleeping at their house.
Dharmapal and Nirmal were sentenced to death by a Sessions Court on May 5, 1997 and it was retained by the Punjab and Haryana High Court on September 29, 1998. However, the Supreme Court converted Nirmal’s death penalty to life imprisonment but Dharampal’s death sentence was retained.
His mercy petition was rejected by the Union Home Minister in 2000. Later, Dharampal filed a mercy plea to the President in 2005, which was rejected after about eight years.
Navkiran had also referred to a case filed by terrorist Devinder Pal Singh Bhullar, who had moved the Supreme Court demanding that his death sentence be converted to life since there has been delay in adjudication of his mercy petition. The case stands reserved for final orders by the Supreme Court.
Source : http://m.indianexpress.com/news/rape-convict-dharampal-not-to-be-hanged-till-may-6/1100296/
Monday, April 15, 2013
Yakub Memon awarded masters in English Lit
Yakub Memon, the lone convict in the 1993 Mumbai blasts case whose
death sentence has been confirmed by the Supreme Court, has been awarded
a master’s degree in English Literature by Indira Gandhi National Open
University.Memon, who is now in Nagpur Central Prison, and his seven fellow prisoners were awarded the degrees at a convocation held here Friday. But Memon could not attend the convocation as police refused him permission. IGNOU Regional Director Dr Shivswaroop said that if permitted, he would personally hand over the certificate to Memon.
Source: http://m.indianexpress.com/news/yakub-memon-awarded-masters-in-english-lit/1102186/
accessed on 15th April 2013
Saturday, April 13, 2013
Pune bus driver Santosh Mane awarded death penalty in road rage case
Express News Service April 08, 2013
Pune: A rogue driver, who hijacked a bus and mowed down nine people on
Pune's streets with manic ruthlessness, was awarded death sentence by a
sessions court, which termed his crime as "rarest of rare". Additional Sessions Judge V K Shevale handed down the extreme
punishment to Maharashtra State Road Transport Corporation (MSRTC)
driver Santosh Mane, 35, after rejecting the defence argument that he
committed the crime in "a fit of insanity" and held that he was fully
conscious of the consequences of his action. "The accused has committed the murder of nine persons by moving
the bus dangerously with the intention and knowledge that the act was so
imminently dangerous that it will cause death or bodily harm," the
judge observed. Mane, a state transport bus driver, was held guilty of killing
nine people and injuring 37 others in a road rage incident that took
place on January 25, 2012. On April 3, Additional Sessions Judge V K Shewale had convicted Mane in the infamous road rampage incident. Before announcing the judgment, the judge heard the
argument by government district pleader Ujjwala Pawar and defence lawyer
Dhananjay Mane. Pawar will seek stringent capital punishment or life
imprisonment for Mane while defence lawyers plead for minimum punishment
citing him as the sole earning member of the family. Mane has been held guilty under relevant sections,
comprising murder, attempt to murder, theft and assault, of the Indian
penal Code and also under sections of the Prevention of Public Property
Damages Act. On the morning of January 25, 2012, Mane hijacked an ST
bus from Swargate depot and went on a rampage killing people besides
damaging over 25 vehicles. The police and citizens managed to stop the
bus near Neelayam theatre bridge after a hot pursuit lasted 45 minutes
on 15 km stretch.Source : http://expressindia.indianexpress.com/latest-news/Pune-bus-driver-Santosh-Mane-awarded-death-penalty-in-road-rage-case/1099275/
Friday, April 12, 2013
SC rejects Devinder Pal Bhullar's plea, upholds death in 1993 blast case
Ashok Bagriya CNN-IBN | 12-Apr 11:29 AM
New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Friday rejected the mercy petition of Devinder Pal Singh Bhullar, who had sought commutation of his death penalty to life sentence on the ground that there was inordinate delay by the President over his plea for clemency. The court said that delay cannot be a ground for commuting death sentence to a life term. Bhullar was sentenced to death in 2003 for carrying out a bomb blast outside the Delhi Youth Congress office in 1993 that left nine people dead.The court observed that the petitioner could not make out a case for commuting his death penalty. "The Supreme Court should have considered our plea," Bhullar's wife said reacting to the verdict.
Bhullar had also sought mercy on grounds that he has been mentally unfit for the past 11 years. "If someone is mentally sick that person cannot be executed, we will have to go through the judgement," lawyer Majid Memon said.
Former chief of the Indian Youth Congress MS Bitta, who is now the chairman of the All-India Anti-Terrorist Front, said the judgement was not expected. "I was not expecting this judgement, Sheila Dikshit declared Bhullar a mentally sick person. It's a crucial judgement," Bitta said. However, he added, "This is justice for those who died in that blast."
Bhullar had approached the Supreme Court in 2011, saying that his death sentence should be commuted to life imprisonment, because there was an inordinate delay by the President over his plea for clemency. His mercy petition was pending for 8 years.Bhullar had filed his original mercy plea to commute the sentence to life imprisonment in 2003. It was rejected in 2011, a week after he approached the Supreme Court.
The apex court's verdict paves way for the execution of others on death row like the Rajiv Gandhi assassination convicts. The lawyer of Nalini, one of the convicts in the Rajiv Gandhi assassination case, expressed disappointment on the court's order. "The order of the Supreme Court is disappointing, it has not taken in consideration the ground realities in the country," lawyer S Doraiswamy said.
Source: http://m.ibnlive.com/news/sc-rejects-devinder-bhullars-plea-upholds-death-in-1993-blast-case/384762-37-64.html [accessed on 13th April 2013]
Wednesday, April 10, 2013
Amnesty International Reports on Death Penalty Trends
By RICK GLADSTONE
Published: April 9, 2013, THE NEW YORK TIMES
At least four countries that had not used the death penalty in some time
— India, Japan, Pakistan and Gambia — resumed doing so last year, the
rights organization Amnesty International says in its annual compilation of capital punishment trends.
Amnesty, the London-based group that has made abolition of the death
penalty one of its signature causes, also says the number of executions
in Iraq nearly doubled in 2012 compared with a year earlier, which it
characterized as “an alarming escalation.”Nonetheless, its yearly review, released early Wednesday in London, said the overall shift away from death sentences and executions continued in 2012.
“In many parts of the world, executions are becoming a thing of the
past, ” Salil Shetty, secretary general of the organization, said in a
statement. Amnesty said only 21 countries were recorded as having
carried out executions in 2012, the same as in 2011, but down from 28
countries a decade earlier.It said at least 682 executions were known to have been carried out
worldwide in 2012, two more than 2011, and at least 1,722 death
sentences were imposed in 58 countries, compared with 1,923 imposed in
63 countries the year before.
“Only one in 10 countries in the world carries out executions,” Mr.
Shetty said. “Their leaders should ask themselves why they are still
applying a cruel and inhumane punishment that the rest of the world is
leaving behind.” Amnesty also pointed out that its compilation excluded what it said were
the thousands of executions it believes were carried out in China,
where the number of capital punishment cases is kept secret. The
organization said it still believed China remained the world’s top
executioner.
Besides China, the top executors in 2012, Amnesty said, were Iran with
314, Iraq with 129, Saudi Arabia with 79 and the United States with 43.
The report also noted that only nine American states executed prisoners
in 2012, compared with 13 the year before, and that in April,
Connecticut became the 17th state to abolish the death penalty.
Source: http://www.nytimes.com/2013/04/10/world/amnesty-international-reports-on-death-penalty-trends.html?_r=0 [accessed on 10th April 2013]
Friday, April 5, 2013
UP: 3 get death penalty, life term to 5 in fake encounter case
Lucknow, Apr 5 (PTI): A special CBI court here
awarded death sentence to three policemen and life term to five others
in a 31-year-old fake encounter case in Gonda district in which 13
persons, including a Deputy Superintendent of Police were killed.
Special CBI judge Rajendra Singh awarded death sentence to the then SHO, Kaudia R B Saroj, Head Constable Ram Nayak and Constable Ram Karan holding them responsible for hatching the conspiracy of murder. Those who have been awarded life sentence include the then PAC commandant Ramakant Dixit, sub-inspectors Naseem Ahmad, Mangala Singh, Parvez Hussain and Rajendra Prasad Singh.
The court had on March 29 passed the judgement convicting eight policemen and had fixed April 5 to pronounce the quantum of punishment. Dy SP and circle officer KP Singh and 12 other people were killed in the fake encounter in Madhopur village in March 1982. Police initially claimed that Singh was killed by criminals, but his wife Vibha Singh suspected foul play and moved the Supreme Court, which ordered a CBI inquiry. The CBI filed chargesheet against 19 policemen of which 10 died during the trial.
Later, one policeman Prem Singh was acquitted of the charges.
Source: http://tehelka.com/3-gets-death-penalty-life-term-to-5-in-fake-encounter-case/# (accessed on 5th April 2013)
Special CBI judge Rajendra Singh awarded death sentence to the then SHO, Kaudia R B Saroj, Head Constable Ram Nayak and Constable Ram Karan holding them responsible for hatching the conspiracy of murder. Those who have been awarded life sentence include the then PAC commandant Ramakant Dixit, sub-inspectors Naseem Ahmad, Mangala Singh, Parvez Hussain and Rajendra Prasad Singh.
The court had on March 29 passed the judgement convicting eight policemen and had fixed April 5 to pronounce the quantum of punishment. Dy SP and circle officer KP Singh and 12 other people were killed in the fake encounter in Madhopur village in March 1982. Police initially claimed that Singh was killed by criminals, but his wife Vibha Singh suspected foul play and moved the Supreme Court, which ordered a CBI inquiry. The CBI filed chargesheet against 19 policemen of which 10 died during the trial.
Later, one policeman Prem Singh was acquitted of the charges.
Source: http://tehelka.com/3-gets-death-penalty-life-term-to-5-in-fake-encounter-case/# (accessed on 5th April 2013)
Tired of backlog, President Pranab expedites mercy plea of death-row convicts
Dailybhaskar.com | Apr 04, 2013, 10:18AM IST
New Delhi: President
Pranab Mukherjee is using his powers under Article 72 of the
Constitution to decide the fate of convicts awaiting death sentence.
According to reports, the President does not have any mercy
petition pending before him and for this reason he is acting upon the
mercy petitions putforth by death-row convicts unlike his predecessors.
On Wednesday, the president upheld fate of nine people convicted
for heinous crimes while commuting death sentence to life term in two
others. The decision was taken after the home ministry recommended
rejection of mercy pleas in five cases and left two cases open for
commutation of death sentence to life imprisonment with a rider that the
life term should mean jail for the entire life of the convict and not
just 20 years or 14 years in prison, claimed the report carried by Times
of India.
The mercy files have been pending for years while moving to and fro
between the President House and the home ministry, causing mental
stress to both the convict and the victim's family. Since, he took over,
Mukherjee has rejected mercy petitions in two high-profile cases -
Ajmal Kasab and Afzal Guru were sent to gallows within less than three
months. Mukherjee had rejected the mercy plea of Kasab on November 5 and
of Afzal on February 3.
The report claimed that the President has disposed off eight death row convicts in five cases since he took over the office.
Source: http://daily.bhaskar.com/article/NAT-TOP-tired-of-backlog-president-pranab-expedites-mercy-plea-of-death-row-convicts-4225923-NOR.html (accessed on 5th April 2013)
74% of the mercy petitions were rejected by Presidents of India since 1981
74% of the mercy petitions were rejected by Presidents of India since 1981
ACHR condemns arbitrary rejection of mercy pleas of 9 death-row convicts
New Delhi: Asian Centre for Human Rights (ACHR) in its press release today stated that President Pranab Mukherjee has reduced the President’s Office to a rubber stamp of the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) while rejecting mercy pleas of the death-row convicts as per the advice of the MHA. The President has yesterday rejected mercy pleas in five cases while commuting death sentence in two cases as advised by the Ministry of Home Affairs.
As per the RTI information provided by the Ministry of Home Affairs to the Asian Centre for Human Rights on 28 March 2013 (available at http://www.achrweb.org/press/2013/Mercypetitions.pdf), as on 28th March 2013, nine mercy petitions were pending before the President of India and these include death-row convicts Jafar Ali (Uttar Pradesh), Dharam Pal (Haryana) Praveen Kumar (Karnataka), Sonia and Sanjeev (Haryana), Sunder Singh (Uttarakhand), Shivu and Jadeswamy (Karnataka) and B A Umesh (Karnataka), Balwant Singh Rajoana (Chandigarh) and Manganlal (Madhya Pradesh).
“The case of life and death as per Article 72 of the Constitution must not be decided without objective criteria and therefore, the criteria for considering the mercy pleas must be developed to avoid arbitrariness in life and death matters. ” – stated Mr Suhas Chakma, Director of Asian Centre for Human Rights.
As per the RTI information provided by the Ministry of Home Affairs to the Asian Centre for Human Rights on 28 March 2013, since the Supreme Court laid down the rarest of rare case doctrine in the Bachan Singh Vs State of Punjab case, the Presidents of India had considered 112 mercy pleas since 1981 to 4 April 2013, out of which 83 mercy petitions or 74% of the mercy petitions were rejected while mercy pleas of only 31 death row-convicts were commuted to life imprisonment.
ACHR called upon the Government of India to abolish death penalty.
Source: http://kashmirwatch.com/humanrights.php/2013/04/05/74-of-the-mercy-petitions-were-rejected-by-presidents-of-india-since-1981.html (accessed on 5th April 2013)
ACHR condemns arbitrary rejection of mercy pleas of 9 death-row convicts
New Delhi: Asian Centre for Human Rights (ACHR) in its press release today stated that President Pranab Mukherjee has reduced the President’s Office to a rubber stamp of the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) while rejecting mercy pleas of the death-row convicts as per the advice of the MHA. The President has yesterday rejected mercy pleas in five cases while commuting death sentence in two cases as advised by the Ministry of Home Affairs.
As per the RTI information provided by the Ministry of Home Affairs to the Asian Centre for Human Rights on 28 March 2013 (available at http://www.achrweb.org/press/2013/Mercypetitions.pdf), as on 28th March 2013, nine mercy petitions were pending before the President of India and these include death-row convicts Jafar Ali (Uttar Pradesh), Dharam Pal (Haryana) Praveen Kumar (Karnataka), Sonia and Sanjeev (Haryana), Sunder Singh (Uttarakhand), Shivu and Jadeswamy (Karnataka) and B A Umesh (Karnataka), Balwant Singh Rajoana (Chandigarh) and Manganlal (Madhya Pradesh).
“The case of life and death as per Article 72 of the Constitution must not be decided without objective criteria and therefore, the criteria for considering the mercy pleas must be developed to avoid arbitrariness in life and death matters. ” – stated Mr Suhas Chakma, Director of Asian Centre for Human Rights.
As per the RTI information provided by the Ministry of Home Affairs to the Asian Centre for Human Rights on 28 March 2013, since the Supreme Court laid down the rarest of rare case doctrine in the Bachan Singh Vs State of Punjab case, the Presidents of India had considered 112 mercy pleas since 1981 to 4 April 2013, out of which 83 mercy petitions or 74% of the mercy petitions were rejected while mercy pleas of only 31 death row-convicts were commuted to life imprisonment.
ACHR called upon the Government of India to abolish death penalty.
Source: http://kashmirwatch.com/humanrights.php/2013/04/05/74-of-the-mercy-petitions-were-rejected-by-presidents-of-india-since-1981.html (accessed on 5th April 2013)
President Pranab clears all 7 pending mercy plea cases
NEW DELHI: Speculation mounted on Wednesday about the fate of nine people convicted for heinous crimes amid indications that President Pranab Mukherjee had upheld execution in five cases while commuting death sentence to life term in two others. Sources said that the President used his powers under Article 72 of the Constitution to dispose of the mercy petitions of nine people convicted in seven heinous crimes. However, the details of individual cases could not be ascertained. The home ministry had recommended rejection of mercy pleas in five cases and left two cases open for commutation of death sentence to life imprisonment with a rider that the life term should mean jail for the entire life of the convict and not just 20 years or 14 years in prison. Sources said that the President does not have any mercy petition pending before him now.
Though the case-wise recommendation for convicts was not known as both the home ministry and President House did not reply to repeated questions, the seven cases on the President's desk related to multiple murders, including one in which a convict who was out on bail on rape charge had killed five members of the victim's family. Among the cases that are reported to have been disposed of include the longest pending case of Gurmeet Singh of Uttar Pradesh who was convicted for killing 13 members of a family on August 17, 1986. The others cases are of Suresh and Ramji, also from UP, who were convicted for killing five members of their brother's family and Dharampal from Haryana who had murdered five members of the family of a girl he had raped in 1993. He had murdered the family while on bail in the rape case.
The other cases are of Sonia, daughter of a former Haryana MLA, and her husband Sanjeev, who drugged and killed eight of her family members in Hisar in 2001, including her parents. Sunder Singh from Uttarakhand was convicted for rape and murder on June 30, 1989; Jafar Ali from Uttar Pradesh was convicted for killing wife and five daughter in 2002 and Praveen Kumar of Karnataka was convicted for killing four members of a family on February 23, 1994. The mercy files, which have been pending for years while moving to and fro between the President House and the home ministry, has seen an unprecedented movement of late, resulting in two quick executions (Ajmal Kasab and Afzal Guru) within less than three months.
Mukherjee had rejected the mercy plea of Kasab on November 5 and of Afzal on February 3. So far, the President has disposed off eight death row convicts in five cases. Mukherjee has also rejected the mercy petitions of Saibanna Ningappa Natikar (Karnataka: convicted for killing wife and daughter) and mercy petitions of slain brigand Veerappan's associates Gnanaprakash, Simon, 'Meesai' Madaian and Pilavendran, who were sentenced to death for killing 22 police personnel in 1993. However, the mercy petition of Atbir (Delhi), who was convicted for murder of his step-mother, step-sister and step-brother over property, was commuted to life imprisonment by the President.
Very few of the death penalty cases, however, reach the President House every year. Even during the tenure of the then President Pratibha Patil, death penalties of 35 convicts were commuted to life imprisonment between 2007 and 2012. Patil had rejected mercy pleas in three cases, comprising five convicts.
Source: http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2013-04-04/india/38277382_1_mercy-petition-saibanna-ningappa-natikar-atbir accessed 5th April 2013
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)