Source:- deccanchronicle.com<\/p>\n\n\n\n
NEW DELHI: The four convicts in the Nirbhaya gangrape and murder case\n are \u201ctrying the patience of the nation,\u201d the Centre told the Delhi High\n Court on Sunday, challenging the trial court\u2019s order staying their \nexecution. The court, which was giving a rare Sunday hearing to the \nmatter, has reserved its order.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Nirbhaya\u2019s mother Asha Devi, who has repeatedly questioned if only convicts and not victims of crimes have rights, hoped that the judgement will be delivered on Monday. \u201cHope it is in our favour, hope it gets us closer to justice,\u201d she told reporters.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The four men \u2014 Vinay Sharma, Pawan Gupta, Mukesh Singh and Akshay \nSingh \u2014 convicted for the 2012 gang-rape and murder of a 23-year-old \nparamedical student in Delhi, referred to as Nirbhaya, were to be \nexecuted on Saturday. But the hanging was postponed indefinitely after \none of convicts, Vinay, filed a mercy petition before President Ram Nath\n Kovind. As his appeal was turned down, another convict, Akshay, filed \nhis mercy plea.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The four convicts, along with two others, had gang-raped the young \nwoman in a moving bus on the night of December 16, 2012. Tortured with \nan iron rod and thrown off the vehicle, she died on December 29 at a \nhospital in Singapore. One of the assailants, just short of 18 when the \ncrime was committed, was released after spending three years in a reform\n home. The main accused, Ram Singh, was found hanging in jail.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The trial court had earlier stayed the death sentence of the four \nconvicts till further orders. Accor-ding to the rules, a convict is \ngiven 14 days between the rejection of a mercy plea and his execution.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The original date of execution of the four convicts was January 22, \nwhich was deferred after Mukesh\u2019s mercy petition was rejected.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
While requesting the High Court to order execution of the two \nconvicts who have exhausted all legal options and whose mercy plea have \nbeen turned down, Solicitor-General Tushar Mehta, representing the \nCentre, said : \u201cPeople are losing faith in the judicial system due to \nthe delays. The convicts are testing the patience of the country. It was\n a crime that shook the country. It was a devilish and inhumane crime.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Mr Mehta said if a mercy plea is pending, then delay in execution is \nonly for the person whose mercy plea is pending. \u201cThe rules only protect\n the co-accused when an appeal is pending before the Supreme Court. \nProtection cannot extend to pending mercy petitions.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Accusing the convicts of \u201cacting in tandem\u201d to \u201cfrustrate the very \nobjective of the punishment\u201d, Mr Mehta said Pawan has been filing all \nkinds of appeals in courts but not the mercy petition.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\u201cMukesh filed almost his seventh legal proceeding on January 31. Till\n that point, he had still not filed his mercy plea. This is to \ndeliberately delay the execution.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Advocate A.P. Singh, who appeared for Akshay, Vinay and Pawan, \nquestioned the \u2018haste\u2019 in the matter. \u201cWhy only in this case there is a \nhurry? Justice hurried is justice buried,\u201d he said, adding, \u201cThe \nconvicts belong to poor, rural and Dalit families, and hence, cannot be \nmade to bear brunt of ambiguity in the law.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Mukesh\u2019s lawyer Rebecca John said: \u201cI am standing here today because \neven death row convicts of heinous crimes are entitled to their rights.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\u201cThe convicts are under no constitutional obligation to hasten the \nproceedings. You can\u2019t condemn me for using legal remedies,\u201d she added.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Ms John argued that the Centre was never a party in the case proceedings before the trial court.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\u201cWhile the government was accusing the convict of delay, it has woken up just two days ago,\u201d she said.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Ms John contended that it was the victim\u2019s parents who moved the \ntrial court for issuance of death warrants against the convicts. \u201cAt no \npoint, the Central government or the state government approached the \ntrial court to immediately issue death warrants.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Ms John said: \u201cI\u2019m a horrible person. I\u2019ve committed the worst crimes\n imaginable but I am still entitled to the protection of the law. You \ntell me there has been \u201ccalculated inaction\u201d on my part. I want to ask \nwhat has the government done? Did you file any plea to hurry the \nprocess?\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Reading the CrPC, she said, \u201cThe High Court has to confirm the \nsentence of death. The sentencing order of the trial court was one \ncommon order for all convicts. The convicts were sentenced by a \ncomposite order which was upheld by the HC and the SC. My question is, \ndoes the scheme envisage the delinking of the convicts? A common \nsentence and a common execution. That\u2019s all I\u2019m seeking today.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Ms John said: \u201cThe Centre has no power to de-link the sentence. There\n is no sentence greater than the death sentence. The Centre does not \nhave the power to execute me separately. After my mercy petition was \nrejected, the court under Tihar Prison Rules 2018 was obligated to give \nme 14-day time till the execution. But the court did not separate the \norders. If no mercy was pending, how did the other three get benefit \nwhen my mercy was rejected. Executions are always common. They cannot be\n bifurcated.\u201d<\/p>\n