[Live Updates] : Nirbhaya Death Penalty Review Hearing

J Bhanumati- we've considered these arguments in detail. There was special hearing on some of these points. SC upheld death. What can we do?

APS- these are new facts. That there was overdose of morphine etc

J Bhushan- These are all submitted earlier. There's nothing new in what you're arguing. In review you should tell us what is the error in judgment

Only first dying declaration should be considered. Akshay's name was not there in the first declaration. Second and third one are results of tutoring. The victim was then continously using morphine. How can she given dying declaration? : AP Singh disputes #Nirbhaya statements

In third dying declaration, name of Akshay came after the name Vipin was taken. Investigation has failed to show the involvement of Vipin : AP Singh

In third dying declaration, name of Akshay came after the name Vipin was taken. Investigation has failed to show the involvement of Vipin : AP Singh

A P Singh submits that Nirbhaya's dying declaration had discrepancies and should not have been relied upon.

A P Singh : There are 2 arguments- Moral and legal.

Moral..Invokes Human rights, says you can kill the criminal, not the crime. India has held life to be sacrosanct. It is an act of violence.

Poor are the victims of death penalty..rich don't go to gallows. Morally indefensible.

A PS Singh : We have been advised to go out of Delhi (due to pollution). Then why death? Let him stay in custody. Not death

A P Singh says that air pollution and water pollution in Delhi has reduced life expectancy. When life expectancy itself is reducing, why give death penalty.