CITATION-(2017)6 SSC 1
DATE OF THE JUDGMENT- 05.5.2017
COURT-Supreme court of India
PETITIONERS- Mukhesh & anr.
RESPONDENT- state (NCT Of Delhi) & Ors.
BENCH-Dipak Mishra, R Banumathi, Ashok Bhushan.
FACTS
Mukhesh and Ors, vs state (NCT Of Delhi) & Ors. This case is also known as Nirbhaya rape case and Delhi rape case;
On the 16th 2021 December, cold night of Delhi, the girl (victim), who was 23-year-old and a paramedical student, had gone to watch a movie at PVR Select City Walk Mall, Saket, with her one male friend (PW -1). After the movie, they both boarded the auto and reached the Munirka bus stand, where they took a white-coloured chartered bus that was used to go Dwarika/Palam Road. After entering the bus, they noticed that six people were already present on the bus. They noticed that six people were already present in the bus; two people were sitting outside the cabin of the driver, and the rest were sitting with the driver. After that the girl (victim)and her companion (PW 1) sat in the two seaters row on left side and they paid 20 rupees farer, after that the girl feel unsafe and uncomeatable because the accused persons did not allow anyone else to enter on the bus after a few time the bus moved and lights put off , and then 3 three accused person inclusive minor boy started abused to girl companion(PW 1) and beating him when he reset the assault so then accused persons are invited to two other accused person to join them , (PW.1)assaulted and injured by the 5 five person with the iron rode that is caused to grievous hurt and his both legs and head are and other part of body, he faint down in bus as result of injuries ,as per the victim story the accused namely Vinay and Pawan robbed and snatched victims mobile phone or purse and other things after doing all that the accused persons did not stop they took the girl behind the bus and started tore her dress and then she was raped by one after one she was suffered From unnatural sex, even the boy who is minor, they inserted an iron rod into the victim’s vagina and tore her half intestine.
The accused persons injured the full body of the victim. They want to kill the victims, so they try to throw both the victims out of the moving bus from the rear door of the bus, but that couldn’t open it, so they throw them out through the front door of the bus at the national highway no. 8 hotel in Delhi, 37 Mahipalpur flyover by the side of the rode, where they were founded in half-dead condition by (PW 2), who called the other person (PW 3) who was in the control room for requesting to call PCR, and he is called the 100 no., and then the victims took the Safdarjung hospital, and then the Delhi police arrived and then police started to searching a accused persons and investigation . After the three surgeries, the condition of the girl did not improve, and they shifted to Singapore for further treatment, where she died on 29th December 2012 from multiple organ failure. Her statement was taken before his death as a dying declaration.
ISSUES:
- Whether the minor can be treated as an adult.
- Whether the capital punishment violated the fundamental right (right to life) of the accused person.
- Whether the trial court and high court followed the norms of capital punishment or not.
- Whether the accused person was liable to the death penalty or a life sentence.
RATIONALE
- All six accused persons, namely Ram Singh, Mukesh Singh, Vinay Gupta, Pawan Gupta, and Akshay Singh, inclusive minors, were found convicted of rape or murder in all courts.
- Ram Singh, who was a bus driver, committed suicide by hanging himself in Tihar jail during the first trial.
- Three more accused, namely Mukesh Singh, Vinay Gupta, and Pawan Gupta, were sent to the reform facility.
- The Apex Court of India Supreme Court on December 18, 2019 dismissed the review petition that was filed by Akshay Sing.
- After so much fighting, finally on March 3, 2020. Rest 4 excluding minors got the death penalty and hanged on March 3, 2020.
- The convicts filed a mercy plea to the president of India, which was rejected.
DEFECT OF LAW
- India don’t have any strict law related to the crime against the woman including; rape, harassment assault, stalking acid attacks voyeurism.
- At that time of Nirbhaya the major weakness of law where JUVENILES can be treated as adults of the same crime as an adult in juvenile justice act. Because in the Nirbhaya case among the all six persons one was a minor accused of a very brutal murder.
- Punishment for rape was minimum 7 years letter amended from 10 years.
- After the struggle of 8 years Nirbhaya got justice 2013 crime were convicted 2020 four persons were got death penalty lengthy process of justice is like justice delayed is justice denied.
- The Indian judicial system has a lack of infrastructure mechanism for providing justice.
CONTENTION
Argument of respondent
- The victim was injured and brutally raped by all accused persons, and minors also used the iron road for injured victims, and they tore the intestine of the victim girl and inserted an iron rod into her privet part, which led to the death of the victim girl. The respondent argued that the accused persons were guilty under sections 120B, 365, 366, 307, 376(2)(g), 377, 302, 395, 397, 201, and 412 of Indian Penal Code 1860.
- All accused persons were confessing their crime, and a male friend of the victim girl was also a prosecution witness of the crime, and his mental status was sharp for giving an appropriate statement; he was describing every minute of the crime scene and her.
- One of the accused persons was found with his bloodstain cloth, which was matched with the victim’s blood sample in forensic taste, and some accused were found with the victim’s mobile phone, which was snatched by the accused persons, and other articles were also found.
- One of the accused was a minor at the time of the crime, but the petitioner argued that he is the main accused because he also brutally raped a girl, Nirbhaya, and after raping he used to insert an iron rod into her private part, which act is so heinous in nature, so if they commit so much of a heinous act, why not treat him as an adult?
- It was such a heinous crime towards humanity and society that all accused should be punished with a death sentence, not with life imprisonment.
Argument of petitioner
- The petitioner challenged the legality of evidence, which is admissible by trial courts.
- The petitioner challenged the legality of the confession statement, which was taken by police to the accused person. The petitioner argued that the confession statement was the result of coercion by police.
- The petitioner argued the challenge of forensic evidence and taste.
- The petitioner argued that one of the accused was a minor at the time of the crime, so he should be treated according to the juvenile justice act.
- The petitioner argued that the death declaration or testimony of the male accused person is valid because, at that time, they were critically injured and mentally inconsistent.
- This type of act was counted in the rare-to-rarest category, so the accused persons were punished with life imprisonment, not with a death sentence.
INFERENCE
This Nirbhaya rape case was a proved millstone for change in criminal law. After that case, the Indian penal code was amended, and some new sections were inserted from parliament, one of which dealt with heinous crimes that were committed against the woman, and some sections were amended. The punishment for rape, sexual assault, and is enhanced by amending the anti-rape laws.
And after the case, the juvenile justice act was also amended because in six accused persons, one was a minor at the time of the crime, so he can’t be treated as an adult at that time, even though he was the main brutal accused.
In this case all the proof and evidence were clear, and the death declaration and statement of PW.1 statement or forensic reports are also in favour of victims, so why did the law take so much time to give justice to the victims.
After 8 years of incident on 20 March 2020 at 5.30, all convicts were hanged in Tihar jail, Delhi, and finally Nirbhaya got justice, and her father said that his belief in the judiciary system and in Indian law has been reverted.
In this case the real name of victim was not disclose by law so that why the case in known as Nirbhaya rape case.
Nirbhay was a really brave girl. After so much injury, doctors were found when Nirbhaya was brought to the hospital. She had only 5% of her intestine, but still, she has fought 13 days for her life, but unfortunately, she failed and didn’t survive any more.
Name = Pragya rai
College name= university of engineering and management Kolkata
Year of study= 3rd year
Course= BBA-LLB