The Supreme Court Monday confirmed capital punishment imposed on three convicts, Mukesh, Vinay Sharma and Pawan Kumar Gupta, in the 2012 Delhi gangrape and murder case. A seat of Chief Justice of India Dipak Misra and Justices R Banumathi and Ashok Bhushan “dismissed” their survey petitions, saying no ground has been made out in the petitions for switching their conviction and sentence. The court noticed that conflicts in their audit supplications were at that point gone into by the court before and they couldn’t be permitted to “re-argue”.
Delhi Gangrape Accused to Hang on 16th December
On December 16, 2012, a 23-year-old paramedic student was gang-raped inside a running transport in South Delhi by six people and seriously ambushed before being tossed out and about. She died of her wounds on December 29, 2012, at the Mount Elizabeth Hospital in Singapore. One of the charged, Ram Singh, professedly dedicated suicide in Tihar Jail in March 2013 while another, a juvenile at that point, served time in a probation home.
Rejecting the review petition filed by Mukesh, the bench said that submissions by his counsel M L Sharma “are more or less the submissions which were advanced at the time of hearing of the appeal and this court had already considered the relevant submissions and dealt them in its judgment dated 05.05.2017. This court had cautiously gone into and revisited the entire evidences on record and after being fully satisfied had dismissed the appeal”.
“By the review petition, the petitioner cannot be allowed to re-argue the appeal on merits of the case by pointing out certain evidences and materials which were on the record and were already looked into by the trial court, High Court and this court as well,” the bench said.
Sharma claimed that though Mukesh wanted him as counsel, police had “imposed” another advocate on him and “compelled to give his confession statement under Section 313 CrPC”.
The Supreme Court, nonetheless, referred to trial court records to express that Sharma had not shown up on a few events, constraining the court to delegate an amicus curiae.
The bench also rejected Sharma’s submission that statement of the accused recorded under Section 313 CrPC was under pressure and influence of the amicus curiae, saying it “has no legs to stand”.
“The above argument is stated to be rejected since the statement was recorded by the court and the accused was coming from judicial custody and could not be tortured by the police as alleged,” it said.