<!– /11440465/Dna_Article_Middle_300x250_BTF –>”There is no quick answer to the pain a woman feels after losing an unborn child, regardless of circumstances”, the Delhi High court has said while enhancing the sentence of a man for banging his car to a tree in fits of rage resulting in the death of his unborn eight-month baby in his wife’s womb.A bench of Justice Vipin Sanghi and Justice PS Teji enhanced the sentence to three years from a period already undergone. He also directed the accused to deposit Rs 3, 50,000 at the NPS School for Deaf and Dumb, Near Delhi Police Apartments, Mayur Vihar Phase-I, Delhi, an orphanage by way of seven installments in the sum of Rs.50,000 each. “It is also apparent that due to the act done by the respondent, not only his wife/complainant suffered injuries on her person, but an unborn child has also lost his life. There is no quick answer to the pain a woman feels after losing an unborn child, regardless of circumstances.”“The victim has been the unborn child. He is not in this world and, in view of the settlement arrived at between the respondent and his wife, his cause is not being pursued by his mother,” the bench said.The court’s direction comes while hearing an appeal by the State wherein they requested the enhancement of sentence of the Arshdeep Singh who was found guilty under sections 307 (Attempt to murder) and section 316 (Causing death of quick unborn child by act amounting to culpable homicide ) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).According to a complaint lodged by his wife, Singh had marital discords with his wife. It also revealed that on April 17, 2013 her husband had come to her parental home to take her back and picked up a quarrel with her at parental home also.She also divulged that while returning in Santro Car, Singh threatened that he would kill her as well as the unborn child and would also kill himself. The convict then gave fist punches on the abdominal region of his wife and deliberately struck the car against a truck and then against a tree.The court held that even though both the parties might have come to a settlement but considering the background, the sentence should be enhanced.“In view of the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case and considering the submission made by the counsel for the respondent/ convict as well as learned APP for the State, we are of the opinion that the sentence awarded to the respondent/convict under Section 307/316 IPC is on the lower side and he deserves to undergo minimum sentence of three years of imprisonment, in addition to the period already undergone (19 days),” the court held.
<!– /11440465/Dna_Article_Middle_300x250_BTF –>A day before Gurmeet Ram Rahim Singh’s sentencing, the Haryana Police said it was ready to handle the situation. Haryana ADGP (Law and Order) Mohammad Akil said that all arrangements in and outside the jail were complete.He added that 23 companies of paramilitary forces were deployed in Rohtak. Meanwhile, Haryana DGP BS Sandhu stated that a total of 38 deaths were recorded.He was quoted saying by ANI: “Total 38 deaths, 32 in Panchkula and 6 in Sirsa. All 6 deceased people from Sirsa have been identified. 24 deceased people from Sirsa identified, postmortem done.”The Haryana DGP also addressed the embarrassing issue of Honepreet Insaan accompanying Ram Rahim Singh on the chopper. He said: “After Ram Rahim Singh’s conviction, she (Honeypreet Insan) expressed her desire to go with him as attendant stating he is unwell.”He added: “Judge said that this is Jail Department and Govt’s prerogative, she didn’t get permission so she is not in jail. She (Honeypreet Insan) was in chopper with court’s permission.” A multi-layer security cordon has been thrown around the Rohtak district jail where the CBI special court judge will be flown to pronounce the quantum of sentence against convicted Dera Sacha Sauda chief Gurmeet Ram Rahim Singh tomorrow.Ahead of the pronouncement of the sentence, police have left nothing to chance and have taken important functionaries of the sect, who could gather followers, into preventive custody.Sunaria jail lies on outskirts of Rohtak city and several security barricades have been set up along the route leading to the prison complex, police said.The Punjab and Haryana High Court had yesterday ordered the Haryana government to make necessary arrangements at the district jail in Sunaria in Rohtak for the judge to pronounce the quantum of sentence for convicted sect chief Gurmeet Ram Rahim Singh in the rape case.50-year-old Gurmeet Ram Rahim has been lodged in the Sunaira jail after his conviction by the special CBI court in Panchkula on Friday.Police and paramilitary forces were maintaining a strict vigil and various ‘nakas’ have been set up in entire Rohtak.Rohtak Range IG Navdeep Virk, who has been taking stock of the security situation ahead of pronouncement of the quantum of sentence tomorrow, said today that “there has been a complete clampdown on Dera centres (Naam Charcha Ghars) and all important functionaries who could gather people have been put under preventive detention in the entire state”.Virk said that tight security arrangements have been made so that no untoward incident takes place after the sentence is pronounced by the court tomorrow.Rohtak Deputy Commissioner, Atul Kumar, said the situation in the district was completely under control and the police and paramilitary forces were fully prepared to tackle any situation.Kumar said every person entering Rohtak from outside was being checked at several places.If during checking, any person fails to produce proof of identity or specify reason for visiting the district, then he would be taken into custody, he said in an official release.’Nakas’ have been set up at borders of Rohtak district and the Duty Magistrate has also been deputed.Section 144 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) prohibiting assembly of five or more persons, and carrying of firearms and other weapons is already in place in Rohtak.CBI judge Jagdeep Singh had held Ram Rahim, guilty of rape in a case that was registered on the basis of an anonymous written complaint in 2002 that he had sexually exploited two female followers.Minutes after the sect head was convicted on Friday, his followers who had gathered in thousands over past few days in Panchkula, unleashed mayhem. 36 people died and over 250 were injured in the violence which broke out at Panchkula and Sirsa after Ram Rahim was convicted.The CBI filed the charge sheet against the Dera head in Ambala court in July 2007 about five years after the registration of the rape case.With inputs from PTI
<!– /11440465/Dna_Article_Middle_300x250_BTF –>A Delhi court has upheld the jail term of a man, whose rash driving led to the death of a 50- year-old woman 19 years ago, saying the prolonged trial cannot outweigh the gravity of the offence. Empathising with the pain and agony of the woman’s husband, the judge said he was left alone and the six month sentence imposed on convict Dharam Singh, now 40, did not call for interference. “No doubt it has taken more than 16 years in concluding the trial, but that fact alone cannot outweigh the gravity of the offence where a 50-year-old lady lost her life.” That single impact was so forceful that she was thrown up from the spot where she was waiting for a bus, into a nullah. The negligence is writ at large. Adequate punishment for that negligence is called for, District and Sessions Judge Asha Menon said. “From this distance in time possibly the jail sentence of six months may seem harsh, but the time has allowed Dharam Singh to settle into a life with family and progress, but his act snuffed out a life and witness (husband of deceased) was left without his partner when he would have valued her company the most,” the sessions judge said. The court also relied on the post mortem report, which showed that victim Prabhavati Devi suffered grave head injuries, and the site plan submitted by the prosecution. “One important fact is that Prabhavati Devi was hit with such force that she was flung into the nullah…. It is also not disputed that the tempo had crossed to the other side of the road and had turned turtle and the driver had also been injured,” the judge said. The court, while refusing to take a lenient view towards Singh, said, “It is significant that the woman’s husband deposed that he was returning with his wife after attending a ‘satsang’ (religious gathering). In these circumstances, the sentence imposed by the trial court cannot be considered to be harsh to the gravity of the offence.” Singh was sentenced to six months jail by a magisterial court in July 2015 after being held guilty of offences under sections 279 (rash driving) and 304A (causing death by negligence) of the IPC. According to the prosecution, the accident took place on July 9, 1998 in Mehrauli when Singh was driving a tempo in a rash and negligent manner and hit the victim, leading to her death. In his appeal against the sentence, Singh had contended that there was no evidence to prove that he was driving the vehicle rashly and claimed that it was the sudden failure of brakes which caused the accident. He had also sought to be let off on probation, submitting that the sentence imposed was very harsh as he had faced trial for 19 years and was not involved in any other accident. Opposing his appeal, prosecutor Salim Khan had argued that a light sentence had already been imposed though a life had been lost. The court dismissed the appeal while also noting that the convict had fled from the spot and “interestingly was driving the tempo” when he had a motorcycle and motor car licence only.(This article has not been edited by DNA’s editorial team and is auto-generated from an agency feed.)
<!– /11440465/Dna_Article_Middle_300x250_BTF –> The Maharashtra Government on Monday presented an affidavit at the Bombay High Court justifying its decision of early release of Sanjay Dutt, an accused in the 1993 Bombay blasts case. The state government presented a calculation of his remission and mentioned that all prison rules were followed. The affidavit has been filed after the Bombay High Court, on June 12, asked the Maharashtra Government to justify its decision to release actor Sanjay Dutt from prison eight months early in the 1993 serial blasts case. The High Court asked as to how Dutt’s good behaviour was assessed and how he was released early when he was out on parole and furlough during half of his sentence. Dutt was let out in February 2016, eight months early, on account of his good conduct while in Pune’s Yerwada prison. The actor, who was on bail during the trial, had surrendered in May 2013 after the Supreme Court upheld his conviction. However, the government in its affidavit has given a division of the duration he had served in jail, excluding the time for which he was on parole and at the end showing that he completed his five years of term. The total parole leave mentioned in the affidavit is four months and furlough leave is one month and 14 days. The affidavit also mentioned that Dutt was not found guilty of all the other offences for which he was charged and, accordingly, acquitted for all the said offences. Dutt was sentenced to five years in jail for his role in the 1993 blasts case. He served his sentence in Yerawada Central Prison in Pune for illegal possession and destruction of an AK-56 rifle. On July, 2007, the TADA court in Mumbai sentenced him to six years’ rigorous imprisonment under the Arms Act and imposed a fine of Rs. 25,000. In 2013, the Supreme Court upheld the ruling, but reduced the sentence to five years following which he surrendered to serve the remainder of his sentence.(This article has not been edited by DNA’s editorial team and is auto-generated from an agency feed.)
<!– /11440465/Dna_Article_Middle_300x250_BTF –>Utsav Bhasin, the son of a Haryana-based industrialist, was sentenced to two years in jail for mowing down a motorcyclist with his over speeding BMW car in 2008 by a Delhi court, which rued that cow killers get more stringent punishment than errant drivers.”Sentence for killing cow is five or seven or 14 years in different states but in case of death of a human being caused by rash or negligent driving, sentence prescribed in law is only 2 years,” Additional Sessions Judge Sanjeev Kumar said.After pronouncing the sentence, the court granted a statutory bail to Bhasin for enabling him to file an appeal in the high court and asked him to furnish a bail bond of Rs 50,000 with a surety of like amount.Expressing shock over the statistics of road accidents in India, the judge said, “I am compelled to observe that India has a disreputable record of road accidents” while noting that according to National Crime Record Bureau during 2015, a total of 4.64 lakh cases of road accidents were reported which rendered 4.82 lakh persons injured and 1.48 lakh deaths.”One is shocked to know the statistics about road accidents in our country. Every minute one accident takes place and every four minutes one person dies in road accidents.”Human life is precious. Road users have a fundamental right to life and liberty which includes the right to safety under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. It is the duty of the state to ensure safety on roads of the people and it cannot shy away from its duty in any circumstance,” the judge said.The court directed the convict to pay a compensation of Rs 10 lakh to the deceased victim’s kin and Rs 2 lakh to the other injured man, a journalist, who was riding pillion on the two-wheeler.It also termed as “unfortunate” the fact that even in Delhi, capital of India, there are no exclusive non-motorised vehicle lanes in most of its roads/part.Referring to the speech of Prime Minister Narendra Modi in 2015 on “Mann ki Baat” where he expressed concern about road safety stating that he was shocked to see the visuals of a recent road accident in Delhi in which the victim lay in a pool of blood for 10 minutes but nobody came for his help.The judge further said that a copy of the judgement be sent to the Prime Minister for looking into the aspect of inadequate punishment for offence causing death by negligence under section 304 A of the IPC.Referring to slogan, “Sabka saath sabka vikas”, the judgement said that this goal can only be achieved when people do not die in accidents.The verdict also quotes Union minister Nitin Gadkari, to highlight the fact that road accidents kill more people than terrorism or natural disasters.Referring to the death of Union minister Gopinath Munde in an accident in 2014 here, the judgement rued this fact that the inadequate punishment provided for the offence in 1861 is still being persisted with.The court had on May 5 held Bhasin guilty of offences under sections 304A (causing death by negligence), 279 (driving rashly which could endanger human life) and 338 (causing grievous hurt) of the Indian Penal Code.The court had while convicting him dropped the charges of 304(II)(culpable homicide not amounting to murder) of the IPC.Bhasin was driving his BMW car when he had hit the two- wheeler on Moolchand flyover in South Delhi, killing Anuj Singh on September 11, 2008. The TV channel journalist was also injured in the incident.The brother of the deceased, who was present in the court room, said that he would file an appeal in the high court against the dropping of a stringent charge of culpable homicide not amounting to murder under section 304 (II) of the IPC.
<!– /11440465/Dna_Article_Middle_300x250_BTF –>India scored a major diplomatic victory over Pakistan today as the International Court of Justice (ICJ) here stayed the execution of former Indian Navy officer Kulbhushan Jadhav. The UN’s highest judicial body also asked Pakistan to take “all measures” to ensure that Jadhav, sentenced to death by a Pakistani military court for alleged espionage, was not executed till the court had delivered its final verdict on the issue. India welcomed the court’s unanimous decision on Jadhav, 46, while Islamabad said it had informed the ICJ that it did not accept the court’s jurisdiction in matters related to national security. Prime Minister Narendra Modi expressed his satisfaction with the verdict and spoke to External Affairs Minister Sushma Swaraj who described the order as a “great relief”. The two leaders thanked senior lawyer Harish Salve, who headed a battery of lawyers presenting India’s case at The Hague. ICJ President Ronny Abraham, a 63-year-old French academic and practitioner in public international law, asked Pakistan to keep the court informed “of all measures taken” in the implementation of the order. The 15-member bench backed India’s contention that there had been a violation of the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations as New Delhi’s requests for consular access to its national had been denied 16 times. The court, which had earlier provisionally stayed Jadhav’s sentence on May 9, also noted that India and Pakistan were signatories to the Vienna Convention since 1977. Jadhav would get a reprieve of at least 150 days since the sentence was announced, as Pakistan had indicated that the execution would “probably not take place” before August 2017. “This means that there is a risk that an execution could take place at any moment thereafter, before the court has given its final decision in the case,” the court said, and asked Pakistan to ensure that court’s order be followed. It said, “the mere fact that Mr. Jadhav is under a death sentence and might therefore be executed is sufficient to demonstrate the existence of a risk of irreparable prejudice to the rights claimed by India.” The verdict came three days after the two countries gave their submissions during which India demanded the annulment of the sentence and described Pakistan’s trial to convict Jadhav as “farcical”. Pakistan, in turn, argued that Jadhav was a spy and India’s plea was “misconceived”. Pakistan’s Foreign Office spokesman Nafees Zakaria also hit out at India today, saying it was “trying to hide its real face” by taking the case to the ICJ. “We do not accept the jurisdiction of the ICJ in matters related to the national security of the country,” he was quoted as saying by a television channel. India moved the ICJ against the death penalty on May 8. The next day, the global court stayed the sentence as a provisional measure. Pakistan, which announced the sentence on Jadhav on April 10, claims its security forces arrested him from its restive Balochistan province on March 3 last year after he reportedly entered from Iran. However, India maintains that he was kidnapped from Iran where he had business interests after retiring from the Navy. Jadhav’s case is the latest flash-point in the tensions between Pakistan and India. The two countries last faced off at the ICJ 18 years ago when Islamabad sought its intervention over the shooting down of its naval aircraft.(This article has not been edited by DNA’s editorial team and is auto-generated from an agency feed.)
<!– /11440465/Dna_Article_Middle_300x250_BTF –>The Delhi High Court has convicted a man for kidnapping and raping a minor girl and then endangering her life by leaving the child in a deserted place after committing the “horrendous” crime. Justice S P Garg awarded 10 years jail term to the convict, a rickshaw puller, while modifying the trial court’s decision to acquit the man of the charge of rape. The court also came down heavily on the trial court for not believing that the child was raped merely because the then four-year-old victim did not disclose that she had been sexually assaulted. “This approach is disgusting. The victim aged around 4-5 years suffering from mental trauma was not expected to give the details of the commission of rape to the examining doctor positively. She was not expected to understand what was the meaning of ‘rape’. “No valid reasons were given by the trial court to disbelieve the victim’s statement about commission of rape. It was not discussed as to how else the victim had sustained injuries on her private part,” the high court said. It also noted that the trial court gave no justifiable reason to disbelieve the aspect of rape and that the findings exonerating the man of the charge of rape was “perverse” and “cannot be sustained”. The order came on the police’s appeal against the man’s acquittal for the offence of rape. While awarding the sentence, the high court said, “crime committed by the respondent is horrendous. Not only the little child was kidnapped, but was ravished by the respondent in a secluded place. “The gravity increases as after commission of crime the respondent left the innocent child alone in the deserted place endangering her life.” It directed the convict to surrender before the trial court on April 17 to serve out his sentence. The high court said the period of sentence already undergone in custody in the case shall be counted and adjusted against the total jail term. As per the prosecution the incident occurred on November 14, 2009 when the girl was taken away by the convict on his rickshaw on the pretext of buying her sweets. Her parents lodged a complaint after the convict failed to bring her back. The police had found the child lying unconscious near a railway track in East Delhi.(This article has not been edited by DNA’s editorial team and is auto-generated from an agency feed.)
Wed, 1 Mar 2017-09:32pm , New Delhi , PTI
<!– /11440465/Dna_Article_Middle_300x250_BTF –>India today released 39 Pakistani prisoners, comprising 21 civil prisoners and 18 fishermen, after Pakistan confirmed their nationality.Announcing their release, the External Affairs Ministry said they are being repatriated to Pakistan via Attari/Wagah check post. “The Government of India attaches highest importance to addressing all humanitarian matters, including early release and repatriation of all eligible Pakistani civil prisoners and fishermen,” it said.Today’s release of Pakistani prisoners comes in response to Pakistan freeing 217 Indian fishermen as part of a “goodwill gesture” in December last. Prisoners are only released after they meet three conditions — completion of sentence, no pending case and confirmation of nationality, officials said here.
<!– /11440465/Dna_Article_Middle_300x250_BTF –>”A tooth for a tooth and an eye for an eye” cannot be the criteria for handing down punishment to convicts in a civilised society, the Delhi High Court has said while setting free a former DU student who has already undergone jail term of over 16 years in two murder cases. Jitender, a former Delhi University student, who was awarded 30 years jail term by a trial court in a murder case, was directed by the court to remain in prison for the rest of his life in another murder case. It was clarified by the lower court that the jail term till death would commence on conclusion of the 30-year-term awarded to the convict, now aged 42.Referring to the “doctrine of proportionality”, a bench of Justices G S Sistani and Sangita Dhingra Sehgal said that it has a “valuable application to the sentencing policy under the Indian criminal jurisprudence”.”We believe that being a civilised society — a tooth for a tooth and an eye for an eye ought not to be the criterion and as such the question of there being acting under any haste in regard to the life imprisonment would not arise; Rather our jurisprudence speaks of the factum of the law courts being slow in that direction and it is in that perspective a reasonable proportion has to be maintained between the heinousness of the crime and the punishment.”While it is true, punishment disproportionately severe ought not to be passed but that does not even clothe the law courts, however, with an opinion to award the sentence which would be manifestly inadequate having due regard to the nature of offence since an inadequate sentence would not subserve the cause of justice to the society,” the bench, in its 38-page judgement, said.Modifying the sentence handed down to Jitender, the bench said that sentence was “in excess of the requirement of the situation” and the “trial court in this case has acted in utter haste by passing the order on sentence on the same day with a pre-determined mind”.The trial court has shown “utter impatience” and “also incorrectly applied the law”, the high court said while awarding the sentence of 16 years and 10 months on the convict, the period already undergone and ordered his release if he is not wanted in any third case.