Top
News Updates

Nirbhaya Case: Delhi Court Rejects Mukesh's Plea Seeking His Trial To Be Declared As Invalid

Karan Tripathi
17 March 2020 11:58 AM GMT
Nirbhaya Case: Delhi Court Rejects Mukeshs Plea Seeking His Trial To Be Declared As Invalid
x
Your free access to Live Law has expired
To read the article, get a premium account.
    Your Subscription Supports Independent Journalism
Subscription starts from
599+GST
(For 6 Months)
Premium account gives you:
  • Unlimited access to Live Law Archives, Weekly/Monthly Digest, Exclusive Notifications, Comments.
  • Reading experience of Ad Free Version, Petition Copies, Judgement/Order Copies.
Already a subscriber?

A Delhi Court on Tuesday rejected a plea moved by one of the convicts Mukesh seeking the trial court order dated 10/09/2013, wherein he was convicted for the rape and murder of Nirbhaya, to be declared as invalid on the ground of concealment of vital documents.

Additional Sessions Judge Dharmender Rana while dismissing the matter, has referred the matter to to the Bar Council of India to take note of the conduct of the lawyer.

"Unfortunately some mischievous brains have been projecting and concuously nurturing a misplaced notion that there is a premium over dishonesty mendacity in this country. This court is of the considered opinion that the authorities involved in the dispensation of Justice are duty bound to dispel such Ill founded notion. It would be axiomatic to observe that time is a very precious judicial entity and is required to be very sagaciously spent. The learned members of the Bar appearing before the court are duty bound to render full cooperation and assistance to the court to ensure that justice is delivered expeditiously to the litigants without any unnecessary delay.

In these circumstances, I deem it appropriate that the conduct of the counsel for the convict needs to be brought to the notice of the Bar Council of India for appropriate sensitization", the court said in the order.

The Petitioner through Advocate M L Sharama had submitted that there are various documents that show that one of the convicts, Mukesh, had filed multiple complaints claiming that he was subjected to torture inside the prison.

As per the application, the complaints against torture against Mukesh were forwarded to the following authorities by ex-military soldier Bhagwan Singh:

  1. Chief Justice of India
  2. President's Secretary
  3. Prime Minister
  4. Ministry of Home Affairs
  5. National Human Rights Commission
  6. Court of Metropolitan Magistrate Ajaya Garg at Saket court

Further, he also claimed that a sum of ₹4 crores was given to the victim's family during trial.

While alleging that the state knowingly and deliberately concealed some documents in the trial, and consequently, obtained the final order of death warrant against the convict.

This alleged concealment of documents, as per the Petitioner, vitiates the trial against Mukesh as per section 41 of the Evidence Act.

Moreover, it is submitted that alleged torture committed against the convict violated his fundamental rights under Articles 21 and 23 of the Constitution.

'The impugned action for concealment of the facts and documents is a serious fraud upon the court and also hit Art 21, 22 (1) and 23 of the constitution of India. Its vitiate trial qua to the Mukesh', the petition states.

In light of these claims, the Petitioner had asked the court to declare the trial court order dated 10/09/2019 to be vitiated so far as its operation on Mukesh is concerned.

As per the death warrant issued by the trial court, all the four convicts are scheduled to be hanged on March 20, 5:30 in the morning.

Next Story
Share it