CBI Spl Judge to pronounce quantum of sentence on Jun 18

CBI demanded the capital punishment of convict in Gudiya rape and murder case as the argument on the quantum of sentence was held before Session and Spl CBI judge Shimla Rajeev Bhardwaj here today.
Arguing for the victim CBI Spl prosecutor( in virtual hearing) Mr  AmitJindal demanded Capital punishment to the convict stating that crime committed falls in the  ‘ rarest of the rare “category. 
Mr Jindal said that convict have previous criminal antecedents as he is habitual offenders being a  historysheeter also deserve the capital punishment. Justifying the case fit for the capital punishment the CBI counsel said that convict was held guilty under sec 376 (2)(i), 376 (A), and 302 of the Indian Penal Codeshould be given the capital punishment provided under the sections moreover he also deserve maximum punishment under section 4 of the POCSO Act which is not less than life imprisonment.
Defense counsel or Legal aid of accused Mr Mohinder Singh Thakur (appeared physicalsin presence of convict Nilu) told UNI that he opposed the CBI argument on the basis of various mitigating circumstances moreover CBI could not establish any aggravating circumstance argument to justify the cold blooded crime.
Mr Thakur said that court hold convict guilty in the case mainly relied upon the circumstantial evidences as CBI could not present any direct or eyewitness of the crime therefore the demanding the capital punishmentis held bad in law by the Supreme court in time to time in various cases.   
The Defense counsel also argued that crime committed by the convict is not cold blooded and premeditated or predetermined which was happened in spur of movement could not be held fall in the rarest of the rare category. 
Mr Thakur said that  convict committed the crime after consuming liquor or drinking and was intoxicated conditions being his mental condition was not normal capital punishment should not be awarded to such case as he had committed the crime in not being in good mental condition.
Countering argument  that convict has previous antecedents of crime could not consider valid reason for the capital punishment defense counsel added that apex courts have been passed various verdicts that quantum of punishment of convict or conviction of accused could not be decided on basis of crime committed by him in the previous cases or considering his criminal background. 
The  apex court decided many cases in past held that the punishment should be only related  to present case which court should decided without being influenced by the crime committed by the accused in the past, the counsel forthe convict submitted before the court today.
” The capital punishment or quantum of punishment should be decided on the basis of basis of rehabilitation and reformation condition of  convicts . Since the accused remained in the custody for three to four years and prosecution did not present any evidence that his custodial behavior was not satisfactory. ”
” SC states emphatically that capital punishment should be given if  convict or  accused behavior is not satisfactory in the custody and he could not be reformed in the custody. ” the defense stated before the court.  
After hearing arguments of both party in the case court has fixed next date for deciding the quantum of punishment on Jun 18 after hearing the argument  in the case.
Case back ground  It is worthwhile to mentioned here that CBI special Judge Shimla Rajiv Bhrdwaj have been held Guidya rape andmurder case accused guilty in all he four account as he convicted him in the court here on April 28.
An accused Anil Kumar alias Nillu alias Charani have  held guilty under sections 376 (2)(i), 376 (A), and 302 of the Indian Penal Code and section 4 of the POCSO Act .  
The convict held guilty on a concrete or most important testimony that is matching of his DNA with samples found on the crime spot. 
The verdict said that the motive for the crime was committed in a spur of the moment, with Nillu making up his mind to rape and kill the victim when he encountered her on a passage in the forest while she was walking from school to home. 
The trial commonly called the Gudiya case of convict of raping and killing a 16-year-old girl in a forest in Shimla district of Himachal Pradesh in 2017 had reached the canclusion stage. 
On the afternoon of July 4, 2017, a 16-year-old Class 10 student in Shimla’s Kotkhai area left her school but never reached home. Amidst an ongoing sports tournament in the school, her brother and other schoolmates who usually accompanied her stayed back and she decided to walk to her house alone – a 1.5-hour journey on foot, which included trekking through a

Two days later, her body was found in a ditch in the forest, with her clothes, an empty liquor bottle, and some other items scattered around her.
An autopsy indicated that she died due to the cumulative effect of “homicidal smothering and manual strangulation in a case of recent forcible
penetrative sexual assault”. In layman’s language, she was raped and murdered.

The incident triggered massive protests and uproar in Kotkhai, Shimla and other parts of the hill state where crimes of such nature are rare.
Key findings after day to day fast track court hearing in the case 
CBI’s chargesheet blamed the accused that  on the day of the crime, Nillu consumed liquor in the afternoon and met the victim on a deserted path while she wason her way home. He first had an altercation with her, following which he caught and dragged her into the forest adjoining the path, where he raped,
smothered and strangled her.

He left the spot, but returned sometime later after purchasing liquor from someone’s house around 800 metres away, the CBI believes. While
leaving, he left behind the empty liquor bottle at the crime scene, which according to the CBI has been identified by the seller.

Several people who saw him in the area before and after the crime or sold liquor to him on the day of the crime have identified him, the charge sheetsaid. Other witnesses include a widow whom he allegedly sexually assaulted a-day-and-a-half after the murder. 
He also allegedly tried to steal someone’s clothes and molested another woman before leaving the area a few days later, the charge sheet said.
Around 55 prosecution witnesses deposed during the trial in a special court in Shimla.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *