- By Abhinav Gupta
- Mon, 03 Feb 2020 12:11 PM (IST)
- Source:JND
New Delhi | Abhinav Gupta: The four death-row convicts in the Nirbhaya gangrape-murder case filing mercy and curative petitions in close continuation and challenging the country’s judicial system with its own laws.
The four convicts on Sunday contended in the Delhi High Court that since they were sentenced to death by a common order, they have to be executed together and cannot be "singled out".
The lawyers appearing for the four convicts -- Mukesh Kumar (32), Akshay Singh (31), Vinay Sharma (26) and Pawan Gupta (25) -- told the high court that some of them cannot be singled out for execution and neither the Centre nor the Delhi government has the power under the rules to do so.
Now, the question arises in minds of many that why can’t each of the accused be hanged separately as and when he exhausts his legal remedies.
Well, the answer lies in a Supreme Court verdict in 1982 which prohibits separate execution of convicts of a joint crime. The judgment by the top court came in view of the alleged injustice done to a convict. In that case, one of the death-row convicts got his punishment reduced to life term and another got a stay on his execution. But the third convict, who was unaware of all these modifications in the punishments of the other two, was hanged.
The case, known as the Harbans Singh vs State of UP and Others, pertained to a multiple murder by Harbans Singh, Mohinder Singh, Kashmira Singh and Jeeta Singh. The three were convicted in 1975 by the trial court in Pilibhit and sentenced to death. The judgment was later upheld by the Allahabad High Court.
Kashmira Singh filed a special leave petition which was accepted and his death sentence was commuted into life imprisonment in 1977.
Harbans Singh also filed an SLP that was dismissed by Justices Sarkaria and Shinghal in October 1978. His review petition too was dismissed in 1980 while the President rejected his plea seeking commutation of sentence in 1981 and his execution was fixed for October 6, 1981. He promptly filed another petition in the Supreme Court, and the court stayed the execution.
On the other hand, Jeeta Singh did not file any review, writ or mercy petition and was hanged on October 6.
All three had been equal parties to the crime and equally guilty, but one was hanged, one got his punishment reduced to life imprisonment, and one got a stay on his execution.
The 1982 ruling by the Supreme Court is reflected in Delhi’s revised jail manual as Rule 854, and was also cited by the convicts’ lawyers in the trial court on Saturday, leading to indefinite deferment of the hanging, which was earlier set on February 1.
The manner in which the convicts in the horrific 2012 Delhi gangrape-murder case have been using the loopholes to file mercy, curative and review petitions in close succession, the execution date may well be pushed to March or beyond since two of the convicts are yet to file mercy petitions.
Another ruling by the Supreme Court in 2014 - in the Shatrughan Chauhan vs Union of India case - is also a major factor in deferment of the death sentence. The judgment provides a 14-day window to a death-row convict to make “peace with God” and accept his fate, after the rejection of mercy plea by the President.
In Mukesh Singh’s case, President Ram Nath Kovind had rejected the mercy plea on January 17, well before the scheduled hanging date of January 22. Still, the Tihar Jail authorities expressed their inability in carrying out the execution saying it would be a breach of the SC order.
Interestingly, the jail administration changed its stance on Saturday and challenged the application for a stay, arguing that the death-row convicts could be hanged separately.
The trial court, however, rejected the argument and partially agreed with advocate AP Singh, the counsel for the three convicts - Pawan, Vinay and Akshay - that their legal remedies were yet to be exhausted.
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, representing the Centre and Delhi government which have sought setting aside of a trial court order staying the execution of convicts in 2012 Nirbhaya gangrape-murder case, on Sunday told the Delhi High Court that there is a deliberate, calculated and well thought of design to "frustrate mandate of law" by the convicts who were "trying the patience of the nation".
Mehta told Justice Suresh Kait that convict Pawan Gupta's move of not filing curative or mercy petition is deliberate, calculated inaction.
Justice Suresh Kait reserved the order on the joint plea by the Centre and Delhi government after a three-hour hearing, during which senior advocate Rebecca John, representing convict Mukesh Kumar, contended that since the four were sentenced to death by a common order, they have to be executed together and cannot be "singled out".
The four Nirbhaya case convicts are playing with judicial machinery and trying the patience of the nation, Mehta said, adding that any delay in the execution of death penalty will have a dehumanising effect on the convicts.
While Mukesh and Vinay Sharma's mercy pleas have been rejected by the President, Pawan has not yet filed it. Akshay Singh's mercy plea was filed on Saturday and is pending.
