Gandhi meets the grotesque
in court
|
||
|
IMRAN
AHMED SIDDIQUI
|
New Delhi, Sept. 11: Mahatma Gandhi, Indira
Gandhi, Rajiv Gandhi….
The unlikeliest of legacies and parallels
were frog-marched through the courtroom today as the defence sought leniency
for the convicts in the Delhi gang rape and murder case.
“I cannot in all
conscience agree to anyone being sent to the gallows. God alone can take life
because He alone gives it,”
said A.P. Singh, the counsel for Vinay Sharma and Akshay Thakur, quoting the
apostle of peace against the backdrop of one of the most brutal crimes in the
country.
Special public prosecutor Dayan
Krishnan, however, sought the death penalty for the four convicts, saying that
a lighter punishment will rob the people’s trust in the judicial system.
“If
death is not given, the society will lose faith in the judicial system,”
Krishnan said.
“If
the maximum sentence is not given, the message will go to the society that
deviance of this nature will be tolerated. This is an extreme case of depravity
and sexual assault…. The act to damage the girl’s intestines intentionally
leaves no scope of sympathy.
“We
will tell the society that this degree of deviance will not be tolerated. The
sentence which is appropriate is nothing short of death,”
Krishnan added.
He countered
the defence plea that the convicts should be given a chance to reform
themselves. “They deserve no sympathy. The society as a
whole feels that no woman in the country is safe today,” the prosecutor
said.
The court
will pronounce the sentence on Friday afternoon.
Defence
lawyer Singh reminded the court that India is the land of Mahatma Gandhi. “How can this court violate the principles of Gandhiji by
awarding the death penalty? He taught us to protest against any kind of
violence,” Singh said.
Judge Yogesh
Khanna cut in.
“I think you
are asking for complete abolition of the death penalty. I do not have any right
to say anything as you have to approach another forum seeking constitutional
amendments. This is not in my hand,” Khanna said.
Singh
apologised to the judge and asked whether killing rapists will make streets
safer for women in India. “Will there be no terror
attacks even though Ajmal Kasab was given capital punishment? Will death
penalty end crime?” Singh asked.
“Indira
Gandhi’s assassins were awarded the death penalty but that did not stop the
assassination of her son Rajiv Gandhi,” he said, adding
that several MPs are facing criminal charges, including rape, but no fast-track
courts were set up to try them.
“When it
comes to a case where poor people are involved, the government immediately sets
up fast-track courts. What kind of message is the government sending?” Singh
asked, referring to the prosecution’s argument that the death penalty would
send an exemplary message.
Asked why he
invoked Gandhi, Singh told this reporter later: “My argument was based on the
principles of Gandhiji and nobody has the courage to challenge Bapuji.”
The
prosecution said the four violated the girl with deliberate and unspeakable
savagery.
“This
falls under the rarest of rare case. They lured the victim and her friend in
the bus, beat them up and raped her. They tortured her…. She kept pleading but
they dragged them naked, threw them from the moving bus and then tried to
overrun them. None among the convicts was moved by the girl’s incessant cries
for mercy,” Krishnan said.
The
prosecutor rejected the defence counsel’s plea to give them a chance to reform
themselves.
“They
don’t carry any element of sympathy on the ground of reformation and young age.
Their crime is not only grotesque and diabolic in nature but the barbaric
behaviour was of the highest kind. Maximum sentence has to be given…,”
Krishnan said.
The counsel
for Pawan Gupta said he was the youngest (19) among the four and could be
reformed. “Judges should not be bloodthirsty and they should exercise their
discretion before awarding the death penalty,” said counsel Vivek Sharma.
( )
OTHER LINKS:
