Abolish Death Penalty India: Madras High Court acquits three on death row; raps trial court, prosecution for lapses

Wednesday, May 29, 2019

Madras High Court acquits three on death row; raps trial court, prosecution for lapses

The judges ordered the Tamil Nadu government to pay a compensation of Rs five lakh to the mother of the girl within three months.

Published: 03rd April 2019 06:57 PM

MADURAI: Slamming the trial court, police and prosecution for various lapses in a rape-cum-murder case, the Madras High Court Wednesday acquitted all three accused sentenced to death and directed the police to find out if any attempt was made to shield the real culprits. A bench of justices P N Prakash and B Pughalendi said there were blatant contradictions in the depositions of the witnesses and the post-mortem report and neither the trial court nor the defence counsel paid attention to them.

While the post-mortem report did not establish rape, the medical examination of the accused too did not reveal that they had raped the girl, the bench said recording its concern about non-availability of quality legal service to underprivileged like the accused in this case. The judges ordered the Tamil Nadu government to pay a compensation of Rs five lakh to the mother of the girl within three months. It was passing orders on appeals by two of the accused and the referred lower court judgement for confirmation of death sentence on the three accused. According to the prosecution, the minor girl of a village in Theni district was kidnapped on December 1, 2014, from her house, raped and murdered.

In October last year, the trial court sentenced to death the three, arraigned as accused by the police. In its order, the high court bench said the lapses on the part of the police were indubitably blame-worthy and not innocent. The judges said they did not go through even the case diary and the original records available in the court were enough to ferret out a can of worms. "We would have noticed a worm pit had we accessed the case diary," they said, strongly criticising the prosecution. The bench directed the Theni district superintendent of police to conduct an inquiry into the lapses noticed by the court and find out if any attempt had been made to shield the real culprits.

The court also suggested departmental action against Inspector Rajaraman for the lapses. Dwelling on non-availability of quality legal service to the underprivileged, it said it was precisely the reason for third accused Kumaresan not filing an appeal against the death sentence though he was found to be impotent and yet charged with rape. "While the rich were able to get the best legal brains and successful criminal lawyers with the ability to suborn witnesses or protract trial, the poor are left to fend for themselves with poor quality legal service, and eventually justice becomes the biggest casualty," the bench said. This was a classic case where the accused, facing rape and murder charges were deprived of quality legal assistance, resulting in the trial court believing the prosecution.

"It is unfortunate that the defence lawyer did not even notice the destructive nature of the statement of the five witnesses, which were recorded, and did not even cross-examine the inspector," the bench said. The court suggested it was time that the Bar Council of India bestowed attention on this grey area and take effective steps to address the malady. The innocent accused had undergone trauma, it said and ordered them to be released immediately.

Source: http://www.newindianexpress.com/states/tamil-nadu/2019/apr/03/madras-high-court-acquits-three-on-death-row-raps-trial-court-prosecution-for-lapses-1959785.html (accessed on 29 May 2019)

No comments:

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

Abolish Death Penalty India

Wednesday, May 29, 2019

Madras High Court acquits three on death row; raps trial court, prosecution for lapses

No comments:

Post a Comment

Followers