Chronology of events in Nirbhaya case

Agencies

February 5, 2020

New Delhi, Feb 5: Following is the chronology of events in the 2012 Nirbhaya gang rape and murder case in which the Delhi High Court on Wednesday said the all the four convicts have to be hanged together, not separately.

- Dec 16, 2012: Paramedical student gang-raped and brutally assaulted by six men in a private bus and thrown out of the moving vehicle along with her male friend. The victims admitted to Safdarjung Hospital.

- Dec 17: Widespread protests erupt demanding stringent action.

- Police identify the accused - bus driver Ram Singh, his brother Mukesh Kumar, Vinay Sharma and Pawan Gupta.

- Dec 18: Ram Singh and three others arrested.

- Dec 20: Victim's friend testifies.

- Dec 21: A delinquent juvenile nabbed from Anand Vihar bus terminal in Delhi. Victim's friend identifies Mukesh as one of the culprits. Police conduct raids in Haryana and Bihar to nab the sixth accused, Akshay Kumar.

- Dec 21-22: Akshay arrested in Aurangabad district of Bihar and brought to Delhi. Victim records statement before the SDM in hospital.

- Dec 26: Following a cardiac arrest, victim flown to Singapore's Mount Elizabeth Hospital by the government.

- Dec 29: Victim succumbs to injuries and other medical conditions. Police add murder charge in the FIR.

- Jan 2, 2013: The then Chief Justice of India Altamas Kabir inaugurates fast track court (FTC) for speedy trial in sexual offence cases.

- Jan 3: Police file charge sheet against five adults accused of murder, gang-rape, attempt to murder, kidnapping, unnatural offences and dacoity.

- Jan 17: FTC starts proceedings against the five adult accused.

- Jan 28: Juvenile Justice Board (JJB) says minority of the juvenile accused is proved.

- Feb 2: FTC frames charges against five adult accused.

- Feb 28: JJB frames charges against the minor.

- Mar 11: Ram Singh commits suicide in Tihar Jail.

- Jul 8: FTC completes recording of testimonies of prosecution witnesses.

- Jul 11: Delhi High Court allows three international news agencies to cover the trial in the case.

- Aug 22: FTC begins hearing final arguments in trial against four adult accused.

- Aug 31: JJB convicts the minor for gang-rape and murder and awards three-year term at probation home.

- Sep 3: FTC concludes trial. Reserves verdict.

- Sep 10: Court convicts Mukesh, Vinay, Akshay, Pawan of 13 offences including gang-rape, unnatural offence and murder of the girl and attempt to murder her male friend.

- Sep 13: Court awards death penalty to all 4 convicts.

- Sep 23: HC begins hearing the convicts' death sentence reference sent to it by the trial court.

- Jan 3, 2014: HC reserves verdict on convicts' appeals.

- Mar 13: HC upholds death penalty to the 4 convicts.

- Mar 15: SC stays execution of 2 convicts, Mukesh and Pawan, after they file appeals. Later, stays execution of other convicts also.

- Apr 15: SC directs police to produce the dying declaration of the victim.

- Feb 3, 2017: SC says it would hear afresh the aspect of awarding death penalty to the convicts.

- Mar 27: SC reserves verdict on their appeals.

- May 5: SC upholds death penalty to four convicts, says the case falls under the category of 'rarest of rare' and the offence created "tsunami of shock".

- Nov 8: Mukesh, one of the four death row convicts in the case, moves SC seeking review of its verdict upholding the capital punishment awarded to him.

- Dec 12: Delhi Police opposes Mukesh's plea in SC.

- Dec 15: Convicts Vinay Sharma and Pawan Kumar Gupta move SC for review of its verdict.

- May 4, 2018: SC reserves order on review plea of Vinay and Pawan.

- Jul 9: SC dismisses review pleas of three convicts.

- Feb, 2019: Victim's parents move Delhi court for issuance of death warrants of the four convicts

- Dec 10, 2019: Akshay moves plea in SC seeking review of his death penalty.

- Dec 13: Victim's mother moves SC opposing review plea of convict

- Dec 18: SC dismisses Akshay's review plea.

- Delhi govt seeks death warrants for execution of death sentence to the 4 convicts

- Delhi court directs Tihar authorities to issue notice to convicts to avail their remaining legal remedies.

- Dec 19: Delhi HC dismisses plea of Pawan Kumar Gupta claiming he was a juvenile at the time of the offence.

- Jan 6, 2020: Delhi court dismisses complaint filed by Pawan's father seeking FIR against sole witness

- Jan 7: Delhi court orders 4 convicts to be hanged on January 22 at 7 am in Tihar jail.

- Jan 14: SC rejects curative petition of Vinay and Mukesh Kumar.

Mukesh files mercy petition before President

- Jan 17: President Ram Nath Kovind rejects mercy plea of Mukesh.

- Trial court issues death warrants again with execution date as February 1, 6 am.

- Jan 25: Mukesh moves SC against rejection of mercy plea.

- Jan 28: SC hears arguments, reserves verdict

- Jan 29: Convict Akshya Kumar approaches SC with curative petition

- SC rejects plea of Mukesh challenging rejection of his mercy plea.

- Jan 30: SC dismisses curative plea of Akshay Kumar Singh.

- Jan 31: SC dismisses plea filed by Pawan seeking review of its order rejecting his juvenility claim.

- Delhi court again postpones execution of the black warrants till further order.

- Feb 1: Centre moves HC against the trial court order.

- Feb 2: HC reserves judgement on Centre's plea.

- Feb 5: HC dismisses Centre plea against trial court order; says all 4 convicts have to be hanged together. It directs the convicts to pursue all legal remedies within a week, failing which the authorities ordered to take action in accordance with law.

Comments

Add new comment

Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.

Manipur CM is mastermind behind violence; Centre lied in Supreme Court: Kuki MLAs

News Network

November 11,2024

The Manipur Kuki MLAs have released a statement calling out Solicitor General Tushar Mehta's 'lies' in the Supreme Court. In a joint statement, the MLAs, including those from the Bharatiya Janata Party, said they had not had any meeting with the Chief Minister since May 3, 2023, nor did they intend to meet him in the future as “he was the mastermind behind the violence”.

As per the MLAs, the SG lied about state CM N Biren Singh speaking to Kuki MLAs to control the situation there, in order to halt a Supreme Court probe into the leaked tapes which allege that Singh has been complicit in the violence that broke out between Kukis and Meitis there.

"We...clarify that we have never had any meeting with Chief Minister, Shri N. Biren Singh since May 3, 2023, nor have any intention to meet him in future as he is the mastermind behind the violence and ethnic cleansing of our people from the Imphal valley, which is continuing till today, the latest being the brutal killing and burning of Mrs Zosangkim Hmar on November 7, 2024," the letter read, while condemning the recent 'barbaric' killing of the woman there, and noting the SG's assertion is 'tantamount' to misleading the top court.

“We, the undersigned ten MLAs, have come to know that during the Supreme Court hearing held on November 8, 2024, the Solicitor General of India submitted that ‘CM is meeting all Kuki MLAs and trying to bring the situation down to get peace’. In this connection, we hereby categorically state that this submission is a blatant lie and tantamount to misleading the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India,” the statement said.

The Supreme Court, while hearing a petition by a Kuki organisation, asked that it submit audio tapes to substantiate its claim that the Chief Minister was instrumental in inciting and organising violence in the northeastern State.

Solicitor-General Tushar Mehta orally informed the court that the Chief Minister was meeting all the Kuki-Zo MLAs and that peace in the State had come at a huge cost.

Comments

Add new comment

Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.

‘Officials to pay from salary’: Supreme Court issues guidelines on ‘bulldozer justice’

News Network

November 13,2024

New Delhi: The Supreme Court took a firm stance on ‘bulldozer justice’ today, affirming that the Executive cannot bypass the Judiciary and that the legal process must not prejudge the guilt of an accused. In a significant judgment, the bench led by Justices BR Gavai and KV Viswanathan set new guidelines for demolition practices, responding to petitions challenging the controversial bulldozer actions taken against individuals accused of crimes.

The rise of this practice, termed 'bulldozer justice,' has seen authorities in various states demolish what they claim to be illegal structures belonging to accused individuals. However, multiple petitions questioned the legality and fairness of this approach, bringing the matter before the court.

Justice Gavai highlighted that owning a home is a cherished goal for many families, and an essential question was whether the Executive should have the authority to strip individuals of their shelter. “In a democracy, the rule of law protects citizens from arbitrary actions by the state. The criminal justice system must not assume guilt,” stated the bench, underscoring that due process is a fundamental right under the Constitution.

On the principle of separation of powers, the bench reinforced that the Judiciary alone holds adjudicatory powers and that the Executive cannot overstep these boundaries. Justice Gavai remarked, “When the state demolishes a home purely because its resident is accused of a crime, it violates the doctrine of separation of powers.”

The court issued a strong warning about accountability, stating that public officials who misuse their power or act arbitrarily must face consequences. Justice Gavai observed that selectively demolishing one property while ignoring similar cases suggests that the aim might be to penalize rather than enforce legality. “For most citizens, a house is the product of years of labor and dreams. Taking it away must be an action of last resort, thoroughly justified,” he said.

In its directives under Article 142 of the Constitution, the Supreme Court established new demolition guidelines. These include:

Mandatory Show-Cause Notice: No demolition should occur without first issuing a show-cause notice. The person served has a minimum of 15 days or the duration stated in local laws to respond.

Transparency of Notice Content: The notice must include specifics about the alleged unauthorized construction, the nature of the violation, and the rationale for demolition.

Hearing and Final Order: Authorities are required to hear the response of the affected individual before issuing a final order. The homeowner will have 15 days to address the issue, with demolition proceeding only if no stay order is obtained from an appellate authority.

Contempt Proceedings: Any breach of these guidelines would lead to contempt proceedings. Officials who disregard these norms will be personally accountable for restitution, with costs deducted from their salaries.

Additionally, the court mandated that all municipal bodies establish digital portals within three months, displaying show-cause notices and final orders on unauthorized structures to ensure public transparency and accountability.

Comments