Nirbhaya II: 7 rapist-killers get death penalty

0
459

On Monday fast-track court in Haryana’s Rohtak sentenced 7 men to death for raping and murdering a 28-year-old Nepali woman in February.

Additional district and sessions judge Seema Singhal called the case a rarest of rare while announcing her judgment.

The case hit international headlines and drew comparisons with the rape and murder of Nirbhaya in Delhi because of its brutality and the involvement of a minor.

The Rohtak victim’s body was found there days after she went missing on February 1 with blades, stones, condoms and pieces of a stick stuffed in her private parts.

“People consider women as weak creatures,” Singhal said. “I can hear cries of women falling prey to crimes. This is a male-dominated society that believes women can be suppressed. Men, who commit such crimes, should be ashamed of their acts.”

The judge, who broke nib of her pen after Declaration the judgment, slapped Rs 1.40 lakh fine each on the convicts Padam Singh, 39, Manvir Singh, 21, Sarvar Kumar, 30, Rajesh Kumar, 21, Pawan Kumar, 26, Sunil Kumar, 24 and Sunil Kumar, 37.

An additional Rs 50,000 fine was slapped on Rajesh, who was held guilty of unnatural act with the victim before her murder.

Additional public prosecutor Surender Pahwa said they were extra careful and scrutinized every small detail given the sensitivity of the case.

“Barring one shopkeeper from whom the convicts had bought condoms, all witness supported the prosecution.”
A total of 57 people had deposed before the court and supported the prosecution in their statements. 3 witnesses deposed in favour of the accused.

9 men had raped the Rohtak woman, one of whom committed suicide in Delhi before police could nab him.
The 15-year-old girl accused in the case of Nepali origin is lodged in an observation home in Rohtak.

His case is still being heard. Like the adult convicts, the juvenile is facing charges of kidnapping, gang rape and murder.

The juvenile’s lawyer, Deepak Bhardawaj, said police initially believed he was 21 but later approached a court for getting instructions to determine his age.

“The medical board had suggested his age to be between 14 and 16 years while the documents brought from Nepal mentioned his age as 15 years,” said Bhardwaj.

Bhardwaj said the entire case was based on circumstantial evidence as there were no eyewitnesses.
Public prosecutor Surender Pahwa said the maximum term that can be ordered in a special home for the juvenile is three years as the Supreme Court noted in Nirbhaya case on Monday.

NO COMMENTS

LEAVE A REPLY