It is said, ‘Justice delayed is justice denied’.
What does the ‘rarest of rare’ category of crime deserve at the end? The Indian Penal Code has confirmed the capital sentence for this kind of gruesome and abhorrent act. But, do these ghastly people actually get what they deserve? There are some incidents, took place inside the Indian continent, and their pending ‘justice’ may cast a shadow over the transparency and ability of Indian judiciary at large.
Incident 1: On December, 2006, the world was terribly shocked and shaken as the gruesome ‘serial killing’ of Nithari, Uttar Pradesh (UP), came in light. Two Nithari residents had claimed that they have seen body parts belonging to missing children of Nithari in the municipal water tank of house number D5. UP police was at first negligent to such complaints. But, some of the residents had themselves begun digging up the nearby land area of the house. After finding out a decomposed hand, police was again informed. As they started digging up the land and searching the drain area, they found at least 15 decomposed remains, which were later confirmed by DNA and other forensic tests that they belonged to the children gone missing from Nithari between 2005 and 2006. One among them was an adult girl, named Payal. It was later found out that those children were sexually abused and murdered by the domestic help of the alleged house, Surinder Koli. The police arrested Koli, and within a few days, they picked up Maninder Singh Pandher, the master of the house too. A Narco Analysis has been granted in the case. Surinder confessed to the police of 6 murders. It was later suspected that there may be an involvement of child pornography racket and organ trade. Later, each of the suspicions was found out to be false. At least 6 police officials had been suspended for ‘gross negligence’. The case was later handed over to Central Bureau of Investigations (CBI). The CBI has confirmed the involvement of Surinder Koli in those macabre acts although the investigation agency revealed that perhaps Pandher is not involved in the serial killing. It was assumed that the domestic help is a psychopath in a killing spree, who had strangulated those children to death. Out of 17 victims, 10 were girls. Koli then admitted of having sex with the dead bodies and thereafter butchered their heads and cut the bodies into pieces. The CBI has later confirmed that ‘necrophilia’ (having sex with dead body) is the main reason behind those killings. Media had an important role to play in revealing the investigations to the people of India. They were left aghast when they learned that one of the 2 accused had even admitted of consumption of the liver and other body parts of the victims, therefore raising question of cannibalism!
Koli had given clean chit to Pandher by saying that his master is unaware of those gruesome acts inside his own house. But, on February 2009, the Ghaziabad special session court sentenced both Koli and Pandher to death, accusing them of being involved in 5 of the murders. Later on September, 2009, Allahabad High Court has acquitted Pandher and upheld the capital sentence of Koli for killing Payal, Rimpa Haldar, Rachana Lal, Deepali Sarkar and Arti Prasad. On February, 2011, the Indian Supreme Court has upheld Koli’s death sentence and ordered a probe against Pandher. The master is now facing 5 trials of the remaining 12 and if convicted in one of them, can be re-sentenced to death as the abhorrent incident has been categorized as ‘rarest of rare’ kind of crime. Now, the question is, when such kind of brutal incidents occur, where gruesome crimes like cannibalism, necrophilia are proved to be involved, and the court has to term them as ‘rarest of rare’, how can one of the two accused be completely given clean chit by the high court? Is this possible that Pandher is completely unaware of those crimes which had taken place inside his own house and the remains were found near his house too? Shouldn’t he be tried again as a prime suspect?
Incident 2: On July 2, 1995, the then Pradesh Congress Youth leader Sushil Sharma had allegedly killed his young wife Naina Sahni, whom he had suspected of infidelity. Sharma doubted that his wife had been engrossed in an illicit affair with fellow party worker, Matloob Karim. On the night of the macabre event, Sharma returned his Gole Market home. Seeing his wife chatting over phone, he grew suspicious. By redialing, he confirmed that it was Karim at the other end. In an impulse he shot 3 times from his licensed revolver. The first shot hit on the head which had instantly killed Sahni. The 2nd one had hit her on the neck and the 3rd one missed her by hitting an air-conditioning machine. Sharma’s abhorrent act did not end there. He then chopped the body into pieces and carried the body parts inside a gunny bag to a nearby restaurant run by him for disposing them in a tandoor (oven)!
Two local police constables smelt something ‘was burning inside the open-air restaurant’ at the late hour which made them suspicious. They entered the restaurant and found the body parts inside and beside the oven. Some of them were burning on the tandoor. Sharma fled to Mumbai, then Bangalore and then to Chennai with police on his trail. On July 10, 1995, he surrendered to the police in Chennai. Sharma was sentenced to capital punishment on 7th November, 2003 by a trial court. The Delhi Court on February, 2007 has confirmed the death sentence stating that the gruesome incident had ‘shocked the judicial as well as social conscience’. But, on May, 2007 the Supreme Court division bench of Justice Markandey Katju and S B Sinha stayed the capital punishment of Sharma. At the same time, the apex court is hearing a Parole plea lodged by Sharma who has been permitted to nurse his ailing parents for 4 hours every day. Sharma is lodged in Tihar Jail since 2004. Is this acceptable when justice is delayed in such kind of ‘rarest of rare’ case, where the guilty repeatedly pleas for ‘innocence’ and even after the confirmation of death sentence by the high court, seeks freedom in parole, leaving a 77 year old father seeking ‘justice’ for his slain daughter? Is this ‘justice’ given at all?
Incident 3: On the night of 22nd January, 1999, Dr. Graham Stuart Staines and his 2 minor sons were burnt alive inside their station wagon in Manoharpur village of Keonjhar district of the state of Orissa. Staines was an Australian Missionary, hailed from Queensland, Australia. He was on a mission to educate the poor tribal people as well as treating them for leprosy. The Hindu activists had alleged that Staines was converting the local Hindus to Christianity what was later denied by his widow. On the night of the macabre incident, a mob led by Dara Singh, the prime accused in the case, set fire to the station wagon. Graham and his 2 minor sons, Timothy and Philip were asleep inside the car. They were burnt alive before police came and rescued them. Police suspected that conversion of Christianity is the main motivation behind the killing. But, surprisingly, in a setback, Indian Supreme Court has rejected the death penalty plea of CBI for Dara Singh, stating that the incident is itself condemnable but does not fall into the ‘rarest of rare’ category. Thus, death sentence cannot be issued. The apex court has also criticized the conversion of Christianity although it expunged its own comment regarding the conversion later in a rare move. Dara Singh was sentenced to life imprisonment. Is it acceptable that a crime like Staines murder cannot be termed as ‘rarest of rare’ where 3 human beings were burnt alive in the name of religion? How can a criminal like Dara Singh be morally supported by the highest court of India, however ‘Hindu-dominated State’ it may be?
Incident 4: It seemed that ‘No One Killed Jessica’.
Jessica Lal was murdered for not allowing a sip of drink to Manu Sharma alias Shidhharth Vashisth. It was the sinister New Delhi night of 29th April, 1999 that brought a sudden end to the life of Jessica, a young model working as a celebrity barmaid in a night party given by an NRI. Manu Sharma is the son of former Haryana minister Venod Sharma, who, at the time of the incident, was posted at the state cabinet. At that night, Manu along with his 2 friends had gone to the party. They insisted to have a drink although it was already midnight and the drinking arrangement was already over. Jessica refused to give Manu and his acquaintances the drink. They offered her money for buying the material which was already sold. Jessica refused to accept the money. In an impulse, as he confessed to the police later, Manu took out his revolver and shot Jessica from point blank range. The poor model fell unconscious instantly and succumbed to her injury later in the hospital. As the trial began, all of the witnesses seemed to be gone from the party before midnight although, in the initial statement, 4 of them said to have witnessed the murder! Even the prime witness, Shayan Munshi, a friend of Jessica and a TV star and video jockey at that time (now a renowned actor) turned hostile in the trial court saying that his testimony was taken in Hindi and it should be repudiated as he is not familiar with the language! Later, the Tehelka newsmagazine’s sting operation exposed how Shayan was bribed to lie inside the courtroom along with the other witnesses.
February, 2006 saw the acquittal of all of the 9 suspects in Jessica Lal murder along with Manu Sharma for the absence of ‘proper evidence’. Manu Sharma’s initial confession was later retracted and an incompetent Delhi police seemed to have not found the ‘murder weapon’. Newspapers came with the headline on the very next day, ‘No One Killed Jessica’.
Failed to bring her daughter ‘justice’, Jessica’s mother committed suicide. Tehelka started investigating into the matter with the help of Jessica’s sister, Sabrina Lal. It was the sting operation of the news magazine that helped to expose the bribery involvement of the witnesses in the case. The whole operation and Manu’s confession was broadcast on NDTV, a leading television channel of India. People of India, enraged by the mockery of Justice, came to the street demanding justice for Jessica. Indian people hold an SMS campaign which sought the involvement of the president of the country in the matter. A poll conducted by NDTV had shown, only 2.7 % of the Indians believe in the judicial system of the country. A retrial soon began in Delhi High court later in 2006. Actor Shayan Munshi was detained from Calcutta Airport and all of the 32 witnesses were again summoned by Delhi high court to explain why they should not be tried for perjury. On December, 2006, Delhi High Court found Manu Sharma guilty and awarded him life imprisonment while both of his acquaintances were punished for 4 years. On April, 2010, the Supreme Court upheld the judgment given by Delhi High Court. The earlier verdict in Jessica Lal murder case had clearly shown, how corrupt the judicial system of India is, where politics and money can buy anything at hand. However, media played an important role in bringing justice for the poor model. Manu Sharma is serving his sentence now and his father, the once powerful Congress leader had to resign from the cabinet.
Incident 5: Priyadarshini Mattoo, a 25 year old Delhi-based Kashmiri law student was found raped and murdered inside her home on January, 1996. Her face was beyond recognition as it was brutally battered by the murderer for at least 14 times. It was complained to the Delhi police in 1995 that a senior in her college, Santosh Singh had been stalking the poor girl incessantly. A personal security officer was given to Priyadarshini but later retracted. On January 23, 1996, Priyadarshini was found raped and strangled inside her home. Santosh Singh was arrested as the prime suspect but later released by the trial court as nothing could be proved against him! In its 450 pages of verdict, the court clearly blamed the ineffectiveness of Delhi police for failing to bring proper evidence. The additional session judge even stated in his verdict that, although he knew Santosh was the man who committed the crime, but he ‘forced to acquit him and give him benefit of doubt’. He even blamed CBI, the central investigating agency for fabricating the DNA in the rape case! The verdict gave birth to huge media outcry and mounting public pressure, just like in Jessica Lal case had forced CBI to appeal against the verdict in Delhi High Court. A day-to-day basis trial had started in Delhi High Court in 2006 and the verdict was announced within 42 days. On October, 2006, the high court sentenced Santosh Singh, then married and a practicing lawyer himself, to death as it put the incident into the ‘rarest of rare’ category. It stated that the victim was constantly being stalked by the convict before her death. Delhi High Court also denounced the verdict of the trial court as the DNA sample given by CBI in the rape case was not at all fabricated! In its statement, the high court clearly stated that trial court has ‘acquitted the guilty amazingly taking a perverse approach. It murdered justice and shocked judicial conscience’. Supreme Court later commuted the death penalty and sentenced Santosh to lifetime imprisonment. May be, his big boss father would have played a role there, who knows?
Now, the question is, if anyone has power and money, can he or she be acquitted of all charges even if the individual is a criminal or a murderer? In a democratic country like India, can such things be tolerated? Each and every example I have given so far shows, the judiciary in this country is utterly corrupted. Each and every public sector is here dominated by power where money plays a big role. The previous instances show something like that. What if it goes on and on? How will the faith and tolerance be established if this sinister practice goes on like this?
Suchetana Chakraborty
