| CITATION | AIR 2017 Supreme Court 2161 |
| DATE | 5 May, 2017 |
| COURT NAME | Supreme Court of India |
| PLAINTIFF/APPELLANT/PETITIONER | Mukesh & Anr. |
| DEFENDANT/RESPONDENT. | State for NCT of Delhi & Ors. |
| JUDGES | Justice Dipak Misra Justice R. Banumathi justice Ashok Bhushan |
INTRODUCTION
One of India’s most historic judgments that has led to numerous reforms in the nation’s rape laws. Mukesh vs State of NCT Delhi, also widely referred to as Nirbhaya Case is a turning point in the ruling on the laws on rape in India. The highly publicized case garnering extensive media coverage and the general public interest highlights the brutality of the offense of rape and the dilemma associated with dispensation of timely justice. A starving monster devoured some organs along with a small town Indian girl’s dreams and ambitions during the evening of December 16, 2012. The notorious attackers and molesters perpetuated one of the most terrible crimes in the history of our nation. The incident of 16th December, culminated in a long judicial tussle and marked a pivotal event towards legal and societal reformations in India.
FACTS OF THE CASE
On the chilly winter evening of 16 December 2012, at about 21:00, a 23-year-old woman and her friend got onto a private bus in New Delhi. The bus had already been occupied by six men including the driver and a minor. A few minutes later, the bus lights were switched off; four of them took the girl to the back side of the bus, and they beat up her friend severely on the front side of the bus. In sadistic fashion, “the girl’s clothes were torn over and she was slapped repeatedly over her face. They possibly could not have thought that she would be a prey to the lust of six members gang, suffer merciless beating and become a toy thing that can be thrown at their crazy will and her private organ would be torn to vent their pervert sex lust, unimaginable and sadistic enjoyment. The victims could not have imagined, it all
took place, as the sequence of events would unfold. The mindset, attitude, the beastly
proclivity, unimaginable self-absorption and individual centralism of the six caused the young lady to endure tremendous trauma and, in the final eventuate, the life-spirit which animates the bodily frame lost its life in spite of undergoing all the probable treatment that the medical community could offer. The death occurred in a hospital in Singapore where she had has been attempted to with the expectation that her life might be salvaged
1. Nirbhaya is the aliаs used fоr the rаріe victim оf the неlоwdоus 16 December 2012 Delhi gаng rарe рісtісе. Thе victims, а 23-yeаr-оld fеmаlе, Jyоti Singh, аnd her male fгiеnd, were returning home town to home in thе evening of 16 December 2012 after seeing the film Lіfe of Рi іn Saket, South Delhi.
2. At apprоximately 9:30 p.m., they caught the bus at Munirka destined for Dwаrkа (IST). The bus had only six раssengers, in addition to the driver. Minor, one of the men had called раssengers and informed them that the bus was headed for their destination.
3. Her friend became suspicious when the bus took a different route from the normal route and closed its doors. When he complained, the other six men on board, including the driver, mocked the two, inquiring what they were doing by themselves at so late an hour.
4. When the friend tried to come to Nirbhaya’s defense, he was attacked by the perpetrators. During the argument, a scuffle ensued between her friend and some men. With an iron rod, he was beaten, gagged, and knocked out. The man then pulled Jyoti to the rear of the truck, where they assaulted her with the rod and raped her while the bus driver sped away.
5. Nirbhaya was not only sexually assaulted; her body was mutilated beyond human imagination. A medical report subsequently stated that she had sustained grievous injuries to her abdomen, intestines and genitals as a result of the attack, and doctors stated that the damage meant that a blunt object (suspected to be the iron rod) was possibly employed in the act of penetration. That rod was subsequently characterized by police as a rusted, L-shaped tool of the kind employed as a wheel jack handle.
6. As previously pointed out, the prosecutrix and PW-1 were observed by PW-72, Raj Kumar, heard the voice of ‘ bachao , bachao ‘ from the left of the road near a milestone opposite to Hotel Delhi 37. PW-72 witnessed PW-1 and the prosecutor lying naked with blood all over. Almost at 11:00 p.m., PW-73 drove the victims to Safdarjung Hospital, New Delhi. She then succumbed to multiple organ failure, internal hemorrhage and cardiac arrest on 29th December.
7. There were three who were judged in this case’s bench and they concluded that the accused did not merit sympathy whatsoever.
ISSUES OF THE CASE
After the case was submitted to the Court of Session, the court charged all the accused with following offences:
- Whether the accused’s acts amounted to rape under Section 375 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).
- Whether the accused could be charged with murder under Section 302 of the IPC, considering the extent of the victim’s injuries.
- Whether the accused had a common intention to commit the crime and whether they conspired to commit the crime.
JUDGEMENT
Judgement of trial court
Upon making the record of the conviction, as aforementioned, the learned Trial Judge passed the sentence:
The convicts, viz., convict Akshay Kumar Singh alias Thakur, convict Mukesh, convict Vinay Sharma and convict Pawan Gupta alias Kaalu are sentenced to death for offence punishable under Section 302 Indian Penal Code. Accordingly, the convicts will be hanged by neck till they are dead.”. Fine of Rs.10,000/- to both the convicts is also levied and in case of default of payment of fine such convict shall be subjected to simple imprisonment for one month. And for the offence under Section 120-for the offence under Section 376(2)(g) IPC I sentence each of the convicts to life imprisonment with fine of Rs.5000/- to each of them. In default of payment a simple imprisonment for one month to such a convict.
Judgement of high court
The High Court, by judgment dated 13.03.2014, upheld the conviction and confirmed the death sentence awarded to the accused by forming the opinion that in view of the facts and circumstances of the case, award of death penalty given by the trial court warranted to be confirmed against all the four convicts. Since the death penalty was confirmed, the appeals preferred by the accused had to suffer the inevitable consequence, that is, rejection.
Judgement of the Supreme Court
• In a straightforward mandate, the court opined that the diabolical act had disturbed the common conscience of the country and that the court must consider it the rarest of rare case wherein death sentences could be imposed. In accordance with the Supreme Court, DNA identification, fingerprints, eye-witness account, and odontology established the identity of the accused on the bus and in the case.
• The bench held, the manner in which they toyed with the identity, body, dignity & privacy of a woman is unforgivable and their evil acts have no mercy to be bestowed.
• The Supreme Court rendered justice to the family of the victim and to all women in the nation by affirming the death sentence for the four convicts of the Nirbhaya gangrape and murder case, terming it as the rarest of rare, most brutal and barbaric attack on Jyoti Singh, a 23-year-old student of paramedicine. The convicts used the victim like a doll and insulted her/his friend at an unacceptable level.
• A three-judge bench ruled unanimously in confirmation of the order of the Delhi High Court, which was in accordance with the order of the trial court in the case. Mukesh, Pawan, Vinay Sharma, and Akshay Kumar Singh was hanged to death for their brutality against a compatriot woman. The bench sentenced them to death as their offence met the requirements of being rarest-of-rare. After the incident, as he was a minor then, the fifth accused person was not prosecuted and sent back to a reformatory institution for three years.
• The previous accused Ram Singh of this case committed a suicide in Tihar jail during his trail which establishes his guilty mind.
REASONING
Court is here concerned with the award of an appropriate sentence in case of brutal gang-rape and murder of a young lady, involving most gruesome and barbaric act of inserting iron rods in the private parts of the victim. The act was done in connivance and collusion of six who were on a criminal spate of driving a bus, pretending as a public conveyance, with the motive of gaining passengers and carrying on crime along with them. The victim girl and her friend were hailed at Munirka bus stand with the mala fide purpose of ravishing and torturing her. Not only did the accused abduct the victim, but gang-raped her, performed unnatural offence by forcing her to oral sex, bit her cheeks, lips, breast and gave ghastly injuries to her private organs by inserting iron rod which damaged vaginal rectum, jejunum and rectum. The heinous way the crime has been committed makes one wonder about the pervert state of mind of the inflictor. On top of that, after having failed to kill her at once, by driving the bus over her, the victim was left half naked in the winter night, with serious injuries.
The National Crime Records Bureau statistics which have marked in the judgment reveal that although women have progressed in education and in all fields and new ideas of women’s rights have brought changes, women’s respect is decreasing and crimes against women are on the rise. Offences against women are not a matter of women but, human rights issue. Rising crime against women is of concern to law-makers and suggests a need arising to study intensely the cause of the problem and address the same by way of strict law and order. A number of legislation and various penal provisions exist in order to penalize the culprits of violence against women. But then it becomes essential to make gender justice a reality and not just paper.
CONCLUSION
Rape laws have really come a long way but there are still some issues that we need to talk about such gender neutrality , a man cannot be the perpetrator of rape under the IPC anddefinition of marital rape. The laws are dynamic they change with time; the main idea is that
the problem with rape laws is that law is only passed when anyone / anything among us has been hurt. Therefore it is necessary that the rape laws should be applied with all their dynamism and that reforms are done then following it the three convicts, except Akshay, asked for a but refused a brief summary of the verdict. The Supreme Court rejected Akshay’s appeal petition on December 18, 2019, and the death penalty was given on March 20, 2020
REFERENCES
Written by Akhya Tripathi an Intern under Legal Vidhiya.
Disclaimer: The materials provided herein are intended solely for informational purposes. Accessing or using the site or materials does not establish an attorney-client relationship. The information presented on this site is not to be construed as legal or professional advice, and it should not be relied upon for such purposes or used as a substitute for advice from a licensed attorney in your state. Additionally, the viewpoint presented by the author is personal.
‘Social Media Head’ and ‘Case Analyst’ of Legal Vidhiya.
0 Comments