SC refuses to stay conviction of IPS officer in Bilkis case

SC refuses to stay conviction of IPS officer in Bilkis case
SC refuses to stay conviction of IPS officer in Bilkis case

The Supreme Court today refused to stay the conviction of an IPS officer in the sensational 2002 Bilkis Bano case.

A vacation bench of Justices A K Sikri and Deepak Gupta said that there is no urgency for hearing the matter as the convicted officer has already undergone the sentence.

The bench, however, listed the matter for hearing in the second week of July, observing the fine is of Rs 15,000 only.

IPS officer R S Bhagora, currently serving in Gujarat, has been convicted along with four other policemen by the Bombay High Court recently after the trial court had acquitted them.

The counsel appearing for Bhagora said if the conviction is not stayed, then he will be terminated from the service as per service rules.

He said the court should grant stay on the conviction.

The Bombay High Court had on May 4 reversed the trial court verdict acquitting Bhagora and others and had upheld the conviction of 11 people (one convict is dead) in the Bilkis Bano gang rape case.

Along with five policemen, two doctors were also convicted by the HC.

The High Court bench had said that the seven persons — doctors and the policemen– are convicted under sections 218 (not performing their duties) and section 201 (tampering of evidence) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).

A special court had on 21 January, 2008 convicted and sentenced to life imprisonment 11 men for raping Bilkis and murdering seven of her family members in the aftermath of the Godhra riots while acquitting seven persons including the policemen and doctors.

The convicts later approached the Bombay high court challenging their conviction and sought for the trial court’s order to be quashed and set aside.

The CBI had also filed an appeal in the high court seeking harsher punishment of death for three of the convicted persons on the ground that they were the main perpetrators of the crime.

According to the prosecution, on 3 March, 2002, Bilkis Bano’s family was attacked by a mob at Randhikpur village near Ahmedabad during the post-Godhra riots and seven members of her family were killed.

Bilkis, who was five months pregnant at the time, was gang raped while six other members of her family managed to escape from the mob. The trial in the case began in Ahmedabad.

However, after Bilkis expressed apprehensions that witnesses could be harmed and the CBI evidence tampered, the Supreme Court transferred the case to Mumbai in August 2004.

The convicts had challenged the order on three main grounds that all evidence in the case was fabricated by CBI, that Bilkis gave birth to a child after the incident, thus, the same proved that she could not have been gang raped, and the failure to find the bodies of some of her family members proves that they were not killed.

( Source – PTI )

Four men get 20-year RI for gangraping woman

Four men get 20-year RI for gangraping woman
Four men get 20-year RI for gangraping woman

Four persons were today sentenced to 20 years rigorous imprisonment by a local court for the gangrape of a woman in the city in 2013.

The court of District and Sessions Judge A I Sheikh sentenced Samir Hussain Sheikh, Md Sharif Badshah, Kabir Sheikh and Imtiyaz Ali Sheikh after considering a set of evidences, including FSL reports of semen and their body abrasions, as well as examination of 17 witnesses.

The woman was gangraped in the afternoon of November 29, 2013, at her house in Vatva locality here when her husband was away. The culprits were known to the woman and resided in the same area.

The gangrape was committed in front of victim’s 10-year- old daughter, who was considered as an additional witness by the court though her statement was not taken.

The court also considered medical evidences such as the FSL report of semen sample matching with that of the accused, and medical examination of the accused which showed abrasions on their bodies.

While delivering the sentence, the court also took into account the fact that the FIR was filed immediately after the incident.

( Source – PTI )


Dec 16 gangrape: Centre seeks extension of juvenile’s stay

Dec 16 gangrape: Centre seeks extension of juvenile's stay
Dec 16 gangrape: Centre seeks extension of juvenile’s stay

The Centre on Monday asked Delhi High Court to extend the observation home stay of the juvenile convict in December 16, 2012 gangrape case who is scheduled to be released on Sunday, saying several mandatory aspects were missing from the post-release rehabilitation plan which needed to be considered before setting him free.

After hearing the brief arguments and perusing the post-release plan which was submitted by the central government, the court reserved its verdict on BJP leader Subramanian Swamy’s PIL seeking stay on the juvenile’s release.

No mention of mental health status and follow-up were among the concerns listed by Additional Solicitor General (ASG) Sanjay Jain while appearing for the Centre. He sought an extension of the juvenile’s stay till the time all the missing aspects in the post-release plan are taken into account.

Swamy told a bench of Chief Justice G Rohini and Justice Jayant Nath that though the juvenile’s term may have ended, but the court can “circumscribe” his movements.

The ASG told the court that it has several “concerns” regarding the plan made by the management committee (MC), set up as per the Juvenile Justice (JJ) Rules. He said the committee’s plan does not mention the mental health status of the juvenile, which is a mandatory requirement under the rules.

He said the mental health aspect was missing from the report of the person who counselled the juvenile. The ASG also said that the plan does not mention anything regarding the juvenile’s willingness to continue in the societal mainstream.

He said that no follow-up action has been contemplated in the MC’s report and this aspect was “completely missing”. He told the bench that as per records, the juvenile is set to be released on December 20 this year and not on Tuesday and sought that his stay be extended till the time the MC takes into account all the missing aspects in its post-release plan.

The court, thereafter, said it now shall go through the MC’s plan and the Intelligence Bureau’s report, which was placed in a sealed cover, and will pass an order. It also wondered whether it can curtail the liberty of a person.

( Source – PTI )

Bail plea of Muzaffarnagar rape accused dismissed

Muzaffarnagar rape accusedA local court has dismissed the bail plea of a man wanted in connection with the rape of a woman during the riots in the district in September last year.

District and Sessions Judge Vijai Luxmi yesterday rejected the bail plea of the accused Maheshvir, saying there was no case of bail.

The victim was gang-raped allegedly by three persons during riots at Lank village in the district in September last. The accused had also kept a knife on her child’s throat to force her into submission.

Police had registered a case against Maheshvir, Kuldeep and Vikram for gangraping the woman and threatening her.

Over 60 people were killed and thousands left homeless during riots in Muzaffarnagar and adjoining areas in September last year.

(Source: PTI)

Gang-rape case: Innocent boys implicated, claims counsel

rA defence counsel representing one of the accused in the Dec 16 gang-rape case here Friday told the court that “innocent boys” had been “falsely implicated” by police in the case.

“I am disturbed since December 17, when I heard that these innocent boys have been falsely implicated in the case,” said advocate Sharma while defending the accused who allegedly gang-raped and tortured a 23-year-old woman in a moving bus here Dec 16.

After repeated warnings by Additional Sessions Judge Yogesh Khanna not to delay the process of cross-examination, Sharma refused to cross-examine more witnesses after he finished with one.

During the proceedings, Special Public Prosecutor Dayan Krishnan interrupted Sharma for asking irrelevant questions to the witnesses during the cross-examination.

However, Sharma claimed that “99 percent of his questions are very much relevant and he will prove it during the final argument in the case”.

Sharma, counsel for accused Vinay Sharma and Akshay Thakur, moved an application before the court for permission to allow him to visit the Tihar Jail so that he could check the security arrangements for his clients.


He also claimed that the jail authorities were not providing him the CD of the security arrangements.

Counsel added that the authorities had not given him the CCTV recordings of the days on which Vinay was allegedly beaten by inmates and suffered a hand fracture.

Swiss woman gangrape: Cops to rely more on forensic evidence

In order to prove the charges against the accused in the March 15 Swiss woman gang-rape case, police said they would count more on the scientific evidence than traditional methods like identification parade.
The trial in the gang-rape case will begin on Saturday in the court of Special Additional District Judge (ADJ), Jitendra Kumar Sharma.

“We will rely more on scientific evidence like DNA finger-printing, samples of hair and vaginal swab collected and examined in the case to nail the culprits in the court of law,” according to the Deputy Inspector General (DIG) Chambal Range D K Arya.

Police were unable to conduct the test identification parade (TIP) of the accused as the victim was of the opinion that it was not possible to recognise them as the incident had taken place in the dark, according to the police sources.

“However, this would not weaken our case as we have also seized the victim’s laptop, laptop-charger and mobile phone from the six arrested accused in this case and all these things were recognised by her (victim’s) partner,” Arya said, adding that all these things would act as a strong evidence to nail the accused in the case.

The arrested accused were identified as Baba, Bhutha, Rampro, Gaza alias Brajesh, Vishnu Kanjar and Nitin Kanjar, according to the police.

Except Nitin and Vishnu Kanjar, all others have been charged with gang-rape.

The investigation officer, N S Rawat in-charge of women’s cell, has filed a hundred page chargesheet on March 26 against the accused under various sections of gang-rape and robbery.

Like other rape cases, the trial in this case too is likely to be held in a fast-track manner, the DIG said.




Gangrape case: Sixth accused declared minor by JJB

December 16 Delhi gang rape case the sixth accused and murder of a 23-year-old paramedical student declared by the Juvenile Justice Board (JJB) as a “minor”, which could rpt could enable him to walk free by June 4, this year when he attains the age of 18 years.

The accused, who was described as the most brutal of the six accused by the Delhi Police in its charge sheet, was declared as 17 years and six months and 24 days-old by the JJB, which relied on his birth certificate and school documents produced before it.

Section 15 (g) of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act mandates that a juvenile aged between 16-18 years if convicted of any offence can be sentenced to be sent to a special home for a period of three years at the maximum, and, thereafter, be released on probation.

However, section 16 of the Act also provides that a juvenile can only be kept at the special home till he attains 18 years of age and he cannot be sent to jail thereafter, which in effect will result in his release. The JJB also rejected the police’s plea for bone ossification test of the sixth accused for determining his age. Lawyers appearing for the prosecution said they appeal against the JJB order in a higher court. Earlier on January 15, the principal of the school, from where the juvenile had droppoed out, had submitted before the JJB that as per the school records he is 17 years and six months-old.

High Court suo motu junks closure report in gangrape case

Taking suo motu cognisance of a gang-rape case of 2008, the Delhi High Court has set aside a magisterial court’s decision to accept the police report to close the case against the two alleged rapists.

Justice P K Bhasin set aside the magisterial court order while dismissing the pleas of the two accused, who had moved the high court for deletion of their names from the FIR of the gangrape case after the lower court accepted the police report to close the case against them.

The two accused had also sought registration of criminal case against the alleged victim of the gang rape case for purportedly levelling false allegations of rape against them. The FIR in the case was lodged on December 24, 2008 at Mehrauli police station.

Dismissing their plea, Justice Bhasin said the magisterial court’s September 2011 decision to accept the police report was “unsustainable” and had resulted in “grave miscarriage of justice.”

“After having given due consideration to the entire aspect of the matter, I am of the view that not only the petitioners cannot get any relief from this court but also consider this to be a fit case where this court should interfere with the decision of the magistrate accepting the closure report as the same is totally unsustainable and has resulted in grave miscarriage of justice. This court can do that by invoking revisional jurisdiction suo motu.

“Consequently, while declining to grant any relief claimed by the petitioners in this petition, I set aside the order of the metropolitan magistrate passed on September 30, 2011 accepting closure report of the police. Now cognisance stands taken for the offence punishable under section 376(2)(g) of IPC, which order, in fact, the magistrate ought to have passed,” Justice Bhasin said.