Abolish Death Penalty India: ajmal kasab

Showing posts with label ajmal kasab. Show all posts

Saturday, September 8, 2012

Six convicts in death row in Bengal jails

Saibal Sen, TNN Sep 5, 2012, 04.04PM IST KOLKATA: With Supreme Court upholding Ajmal Kasab's death sentence, six death row convicts in Bengal spending the life in the condemned cells in Alipore and Presidency Jails still await to know their fate. Among the six, three appeals are now pending in the Supreme Court; the rest in Calcutta high court. In one case, the convict's kin has informed jail authorities that the high court has commuted the death sentence to life but the order is yet to reach Alipore jail. The last death sentence in the country was executed in Alipore central jail on August 14, 2004. Dhananjoy Chaterjee, 39, was hanged for raping and murdering a 14-year-old girl in Bhowanipore on March 5, 1990. Chatterjee was a security-guard of the complex where the child stayed. Before that a serial killer Auto Shankar was hanged in Chennai central jail on April 27, 1995. Before Dhananjoy, the last execution in Bengal was also in Alipore central jail in 1993 when murder convicts, Kartik Sil and Sukumar Burman, were hanged. Since Dhananjoy's hanging courts in Bengal had passed several death sentences, the first was by a special sessions court which sentenced to death Aftab Ansari and Jamaluddin Naser to death on April 27, 2005 in the USIS attack case. Ansari is in Alipore jail since May 3, 2002; while Naser was brought here before him, on February 21 that year. The death sentence was upheld by the Calcutta high court prompting the duo to appeal against it in the Supreme Court. The other case which pending in the Supreme Court, sources said, is the death sentence awarded by the General Security Force court March 2, 2007 to former BSF head constable Balbir Singh. It is learnt the Guwahati high court has already turned down Singh's appeal against it prompting him to move the Supreme Court. Singh - admitted to Alipore jail on October 6, 2010 - was convicted for murdering his superior Deputy Commandant Kameswar Singh for ticking him off for dereliction of duty while posted at Rajnagar outpost in South Tripura district. Balbir then gunned down Assistant Commandant Alok Ranjan as he had witnessed the killing of the other officer. Among the others who've also appealed against their death sentence in Calcutta high court are Sambhu Lohar (in Alipore jail) and Kebal Roy (in Presidency jail). Sambhu was sentenced to death by a Suri court on September 15, 2010 for murdering two people inside an Sainthia oil mill. The victims were first drugged and later hacked to death with a chopper later their bodies were set on to destroy evidence. The day the Additional Sessions Judge, 3rd court, Suri sentenced Sambhu to death he was immediately brought to Alipore jail and send to the condemned cell. Roy was sentenced to death by a Kolkata court on September 24, 2008. Roy had murdered his employers - Tarachand (68) and Sarada Devi Banka (56) - in their Mansarovar Apartments home in Camac Street on April 18, 2005. Roy, police said, also stole Rs 20-lakhs worth of valuables. After the murder, Roy fled Kolkata and was arrested from his native village Simultala in Bihar a month later. Roy is in Presidency jail ever since his arrest. On August 25, this year, they've informed that a Calcutta high court division bench has commuted Bagdi's death sentence to life imprisonment. The formal court orders are yet to reach Alipore jail, though. These convicts aren't the only ones in condemned cells till a few days back. Nikku Yadav, the domestic help who was convicted of murdering his employer Rabindra Kaur Luthra in her Tripura Enclave flat in Ballygunge Circular Road on February 15, 2007, was another death row convict till the Calcutta high court on October 7, 2010 commuted his death sentence to life. Nikku had been handed death by the Alipore Sessions Court on August 29, 2008. source: http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2012-09-05/kolkata/33614556_1_alipore-jail-central-jail-death-sentence [accessed on 8th September 2012]

Thursday, August 30, 2012

Ajmal Kasab's mercy plea will be processed fast: Shinde

NEW DELHI: With a presidential pardon the only option before Lashkar-e-Taiba terrorist Ajmal Kasab after the Supreme Court upheld his death sentence, home minister Sushil Kumar Shinde on Wednesday said the government would ensure that the Pakistani's mercy plea, if it came, was processed in the minimum possible time. "If Ajmal Kasab files mercy plea, we will ensure that it is disposed of in minimum time," Shinde said when asked whether Kasab's execution would take time since he has the option of moving a mercy petition. The delay in disposing of mercy petitions of death row convicts has created unease within and outside the government. At present, 11 mercy petitions, including that of Parliament attack convict Afzal Guru, are pending with the President. Guru had filed his mercy plea in 2006. It took the government over five years to process his file before sending it to the President. Though the government gave its opinion rejecting Guru's mercy plea to the President over a year ago, it is still pending with the President's secretariat. It is the discretion of the President when to take a final call over the matter as the Constitution does not provide any time-limit to dispose it of. Home secretary R K Singh said Kasab has not yet filed any mercy petition. "We will see once he does," he said. Information and broadcasting minister Ambika Soni appeared more straightforward on the issue. She said while it was Kasab's constitutional right to seek a presidential review, such clemency should not be shown. "This was an awaited judgment by Supreme Court. I think the judgment should be abided by... Personally, I think there should be no clemency for such cases," she said. Source: The times of India TNN | Aug 30, 2012, 03.05AM IST http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/Ajmal-Kasabs-mercy-plea-will-be-processed-fast-Shinde/articleshow/15969385.cms [accessed on 30th August 2012]

Tuesday, November 29, 2011

Exclusive! Saving killer Ajmal Kasab

Three years ago, Pakistani terrorist Mohammad Ajmal Amir Kasab and his accomplices created mayhem in Mumbai and killed 166 innocent people. The lone captured terrorist of the 26/11 attack has since been enjoying Indian ‘hospitality’ at Mumbai’s Arthur Road jail with the government spending Rs16 crore on the Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT) militant.

The Supreme Court will hear some ‘interesting’ arguments in favour of Kasab who was awarded the death penalty on five counts. Earlier this year, Kasab filed an appeal in the Supreme Court challenging the death sentence awarded to him.

Noted lawyer Raju Ramachandran who will defend Kasab in the hearing scheduled to begin on January 29, 2012, refused to comment. “I am merely responding to the call of professional duty,” he said. Ramachandran’s junior Gaurav Aggarwal has filed an appeal in the Supreme Court (a copy of which is with DNA) in defence of Kasab.

On of the major arguments that will be made to defend Kasab is that contrary to the charge, he did not wage war against India. The argument is that unlike Parliament and the Red Fort, the Chhatrapati Shivaji Terminus (CST) in Mumbai where Kasab and his accomplice Abu Ismail fired indiscriminately at innocents is not the symbol of authority of the Republic of India.

CST is owned by the railway ministry — an instrument of the Union government. Attacking a railway station or a hospital (Cama) does not amount to waging war against the government of India is the defence.

DNA has learnt that Ramachandran will also question the test identification parade (TIP) by the investigating agencies of a blood-soaked Kasab following the attack. Kasab’s photographs and visuals were flashed across the print and electronic media after the 26/11 attack and he was painted as the culprit. The argument of Kasab’s legal team is that no legally valid TIP was done to check the veracity of allegations that it was indeed Kasab and his accomplices who had attacked places such as CST and Cama hospital.

Aggarwal’s appeal also seeks to point out that a ‘foreigner’ like Kasab cannot be expected to know the law of the country. Sources said Kasab was forced to make a confession before a magistrate without being offered the services of a lawyer. Though he retracted his statement during the trial, he was awarded the death penalty for waging war against India.

“The courts, however, ignored the fact that Kasab did not know the gravity of the confession he made to the magistrate,” a source said. “Therefore, the conviction based on Kasab’s questionable confession is illegal by law and by retracting his statement, Kasab vitiated the trial.”

Ramchandran is expected to take six days to complete his arguments while former solicitor general Gopal Subramanium could take a bit longer to prove that Kasab is not innocent. A two-judge bench of justices Aftab Alam and CK Prasad will hear Kasab’s appeal from January 29, 2012.

“If everything goes according to the case calendar, the Supreme Court could pronounce its verdict around the beginning of April,” a source said.

Kasab who is facing the death penalty on five counts has used all possible ploys to extract the most out of the liberal humanitarian aspects of the Indian Constitution and the legal system. He had earlier said he was a teenager and a foreign national who was tutored by a terror group and did not deserve the death penalty awarded by a foreign court.

He also wrote to the chief justice of India from the Arthur Road jail, seeking suspension of the capital sentence. In his letter, Kasab also expressed his inability to hire a lawyer to defend him. Taking note of the letter, the Supreme Court stayed Kasab’s execution and urged Ramachandran to prepare Kasab’s defence and file a proper special leave petition.

Ramachandran’s legal acumen is well known as he was a lawyer for the Volcker Commission inquiry panel that probed into allegations against former Supreme Court judge V Ramasami.

He also assisted the Supreme Court in the 2002 Gujarat riots cases and his recent report suggested prima facie evidence against Gujarat chief minister Narendra Modi in the murder case of Congress MP Ehsan Jaffri.

Source: Published: Monday, Nov 28, 2011, 9:00 IST
By Rakesh Bhatnagar | Place: New Delhi | Agency: DNA

http://www.dnaindia.com/india/report_exclusive-saving-killer-ajmal-kasab_1618255
accessed on 29th November 2011

Friday, October 14, 2011

US wanted Kasab's lawyer to build case for his freedom: WikiLeaks

Aman Sharma New Delhi, October 14, 2011 | UPDATED 10:15 IST

Lending a touch of irony, 26/ 11 terrorist Ajmal Kasab has approached the Supreme Court in appeal against his death sentence. But the plea he has made there, has been dismissed by his attorney S. G. Abbas Kazmi two years ago before the trial court pronounced its verdict.

Kasab has pleaded in the apex court that he was "brainwashed like a robot" into committing the dastardly act "in the name of god" and, "given my young age", had a chance to reform.

But a secret American diplomatic cable exposed by WikiLeaks shows that Kazmi had discounted exploring this avenue when the US had mentioned these very arguments to him in the trial court: if he would contact Kasab's parents in Pakistan to build up the case for mitigating circumstances which may help the convict escape the noose.

An official of the US embassy had met Kazmi on September 3, 2009, asking him if India would contact Kasab's parents in Pakistan to know the circumstances under which he was indoctrinated by the Lashkar e-Tayyeba (LeT) and whether he had been brainwashed. But Kazmi had dismissed the possibility of such a move, saying there were no funds to bring Kasab's parents to India and they would not get a visa.

"The death penalty is authorised in India only in rarest of the rare cases, Kazmi said, where there has been extreme brutality or inhuman treatment. The Indian law allows consideration of mitigating factors, such as whether Kasab had been brainwashed, but Kazmi is not planning on calling witnesses to testify on behalf of Kasab to explain the circumstances that led him to be indoctrinated by the LeT," the cable stated.

Kazmi ruled out calling anyone from Pakistan to testify on his behalf in the mitigation phase of the trial. Kazmi said: "I am an Indian citizen. I am not going to contact anyone in Pakistan." Even if he wanted to, there were no funds to bring such a witness to Mumbai, nor was it likely (that) the person would get a visa, he surmised. Further, he noted that no one from Kasab's family had contacted him, the cable added. Kasab's parents, Amir Shahban Kasab and Noor Illah, live in Faridkot village of Okara district. His family has rarely spoken up except when his father confirmed to Pakistani TV channels after 26/ 11 that Kasab was his son.

The US cable stated that even Kasab's defence lawyer was certain that the trial court would award him the death sentence.

"Kazmi said that given the overwhelming evidence against Kasab, he expected Kasab to be convicted and sentenced to death. Kasab's and Kazmi's fatalistic acceptance of the ultimate outcome of the trial appears to be shared by the public at large," the cable added.

Kazmi also complained to the US official that his attempts to provide Kasab with a "robust defence and fair trial" had been hampered from the beginning, the cable stated. "Kazmi is not permitted to confer with his client in private to prepare the defence.

Source: http://indiatoday.intoday.in/story/wikileaks-ajmal-kasab-us-26-11-mumbai-terrorist-attacks/1/154812.html

Accessed 14th October 2011

Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)

The Death Penalty Scenario in India

India is one of the 193 countries that retains death penalty. There has always been a few imminent judges who have pronounced compelling verdicts upholding the rights of prisoners on death row. There has been increasing debate in various platforms advocating abolition of death penalty or at least to rethink sentencing policies in India. The Indian government has however always been committed to the retention of the death penalty, irrespective of their political ideology. India has voted against a United Nations General Assembly (UNGA) draft resolution on the use of death penalty, saying it goes against the statutory law of the country where an execution is carried out in the "rarest of rare" cases. India retains the death penalty as punishment for a number of crimes including murder, kidnapping, terrorism, desertion, inducement to suicide of a minor or a mentally-retarded person and has more recently in 2013 come to include the offence of rape in certain circumstances. Most recently, there is an outrage over child rape and murder.

After observing an unofficial moratorium of 8 years in India, the Indian Government in November 2012 carried out the execution of Ajmal Kasab, convicted in the Mumbai attacks case, without public knowledge. This was followed by the secret execution of Afzal Guru, convicted in the Parliament attack case of 2001, in February 2013, under similar circumstances, without intimating his immediate family or affording a chance of judicial review. In both cases, the executions were carried out under covert operations conducted by the Government immediately upon rejection of their mercy petitions. Before these executions, the last execution to be carried out in India was that of Dhananjoy Chatterjee in 2004 who was convicted of rape and murder and which sentence was carried out after he had spent 13 years in solitary confinement. Following this, several mercy petitions of death row convicts have come to be rejected. The fear of execution of such convicts is imminent. Bolstered by the Government's unapologetic conduct and public outcry, especially in recent cases of rape and murder reported in the country, the courts are continuing to hand down death sentences at an alarming rate.

In the recent past, there have been a few empirical studies (mainly four) conducted with prisoners on death row. This has highlighted the situation of prisoners on death row.

(1) Most recently the India Exclusion Report 2017-18 found that fair trial rights and guarantees are reduced to a nullity and seeks to breach the citadel of the collective silence. It further said that Convicts on death row in India belong to groups marginalised along the axes of caste, religion, economic vulnerability and educational deprivation, and their fair trial rights, though a part of the Right to Life guaranteed by the Constitution, are invariably non-existent, a survey of 371 out of the 385 persons living under the death sentence and their families has revealed.

(2) Another study was The Death Penalty Research Project (2015) which was conceived with an aim to document the socio-economic profile of prisoners sentenced to death in India and map their experience within the criminal justice system.

There were two other academic studies that were done conducted by Dr. Reena Mary George –

(3)“Voices of prisoners surviving the death row in India” (2014) done through the University of Vienna under the guidance of Prof. Dr. Christoph Reinprecht (Sociology) and Prof. Dr. Manfred Nowak (Law and Ex-United Nations Rapporteur on Torture). George’s research highlights three salient features, namely: poverty, social exclusion and marginalisation are antecedent to death penalty; death penalty is a constructed account by the state machinery; and prisoners on death row situate dignity higher in the juxtaposition of death and dignity.

(4) Another one “Death Penalty – A Human Rights Perspective” (2009) done through the University of Mumbai under the guidance of Retired Justice Hosbet Suresh. This was a study in Maharashtra with the objectives to firstly study the impact of death penalty on the social, mental, and physical being of the inmate and secondly, to study the perception of opinion leaders on death penalty with reference to human rights. All the above reports are public documents.

According to the National Crime Records Bureau, Prison Statistics 2015, there are 101 prisoners sentenced to death. The actual figure of sentences originally awarded is much higher considering the death sentences of 49 convicts came to be commuted to life imprisonment in the said period. As of today, almost in 2019, the figures are unknown through government statistics, however, research centres claim this figure to be around 371 convicts. During the 1980s the Supreme Court sought to restrict the use of the death penalty by characterizing it as a punishment reserved only for the “rarest of the rare” cases. The doctrine has not had the desired effect. According to a former chief justice of the Delhi High Court, Rajindar Sachar: “after the rarest of rare doctrine was introduced in 1980, the Supreme Court confirmed death penalty in 40 per cent of cases in the period 1980-90 while it was 37.7 per cent between 1970 and 1980. For the high courts it rose from 59 per cent in 1970-80 to 65 per cent during 1980-90”. Over the past two decades the death penalty has been extended to include more crimes and been handed down with increasing frequency.

Most recently while commuting a sentence in Supreme Court (2018), Justice Joseph did not seek the reconsideration of the Bachan Singh judgment, but only sought to re-examine the purpose and practice of the death penalty, and whether as a punishment, it serves any goal at all. In other words, the death penalty can continue to remain constitutionally valid because of the Bachan Singh judgment, but its application in substantive cases coming before the court must be restricted to only those cases which meet the criteria laid down in that case.

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