Tuesday January 23, 2018
Home Politics Supreme Court...

Supreme Court dismisses plea in December 16 gang-rape case

0
//
40
Republish
Reprint

New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Monday dismissed a plea for halting the release of the juvenile accused in December 16, 2012, gang-rape.

The family of the young woman who was brutally gang-raped said it will continue its fight for justice.

“We share your concern,” an apex court’s vacation bench of Justice AK Goel and Justice UU Lalit said while dismissing the plea filed by the Delhi Commission for Women.

The convict in the Nirbhaya gang-rape case, who is now 20 years old, was a juvenile when he committed the heinous crime in 2012 along with his friends in a moving bus in the national capital.

He was tried under the Juvenile Justice Act and ordered to be kept in a remand home for three years. He was released on December 20.

Delhi Commission for Women chief Swati Maliwal, who filed the plea in the apex court for a halt on his release, said the (central) government had failed the women of the country.

“The government has failed the women of the country… It is a dark day for the entire nation,” Maliwal told the media outside the Supreme Court.

“The time for candle marches is over; it is now time for women to take up ‘Mashaal’ (torchlight),” she added.

The deceased rape victim’s mother expressed dissatisfaction over the Supreme Court ruling on Monday, saying such verdict will encourage crime against women in society.

“All I have to say is that the plea, which was rejected by all three courts, will encourage more such crimes to be committed in society against women.”

“There is no provision (to convict juveniles) or to punish them. They (courts) are more concerned about the accused. Women were cheated and they continue to be cheated. Nobody wants to do anything on women’s safety,” Nirbhaya’s mother said after the verdict.

“I will continue to fight to bring changes in the law,” she said.

“Let’s see what happens in the future. As of now only one convict is released. There are four more convicts. I appeal to the Supreme Court that although the juvenile was released since there is no provision to convict him further, please convict them (other four) and hang them and give justice to Nirbhaya,” she added.(IANS)

Click here for reuse options!
Copyright 2015 NewsGram

Next Story

Supreme Court to hear Pleas challenging Article 35A after Diwali, which talks about Special Rights and privileges of Permanent Residents of Jammu and Kashmir

Article 35A talks about special rights and privileges given to only permanent residents of Jammu and Kashmir

0
//
44
The Supreme Court of India
The Supreme Court of India. Wikimedia
  • The plea said that the special status which people of Jammu and Kashmir enjoys should be canceled
  • In 1954 by a Presidential Order, Article 35A was added to the Indian Constitution
  • The Plea has also challenged a particular provision of the Constitution which denies the right over the property to a woman who marries someone who is from outside the state 

New Delhi (India), August 25, 2017: After Diwali, the Supreme Court of India will hear pleas which challenge the Article 35A, the article talks about special rights and privileges given to people who are permanent residents of Jammu and Kashmir.

Supposedly, the date decided for the hearing of pleas was August 29 but both the Centre and state government of Jammu and Kashmir wanted 4 weeks’ time in order to file their replies respectively, due to this reason the hearing has been postponed to a later date.

The plea said that the special status which people of Jammu and Kashmir enjoys should be canceled.

The Supreme Court was earlier in favor of hearing the case by a constitution bench consisting of 5 judges if the Article 35A is ultra vires (beyond one’s legal power or authority) of the Indian Constitution or if there is any sort of procedural lapse (defective execution of work).

Also Read: Landmark Judgement: Right to Privacy Becomes Fundamental Right of India, Rules Supreme Court

The meaning of Article 35A as per Constitution is that the article gives the right to the state legislature of Jammu and Kashmir to call them permanent residents of that state and also give those (permanent residents) some special rights and privileges whereas by article 370 a special status is given to the state- Jammu and Kashmir.

In 1954 by a Presidential Order, Article 35A was added to the Indian Constitution. According to ANI report, “It also empowers the state’s legislature to frame any law without attracting a challenge on grounds of violating the Right to Equality of people from other states or any other right under the Indian Constitution.” This is the kind of power that this Article holds.

This Article was dragged into controversy after a 2nd plea, was filed by a lawyer and former member of the National Commission for Women Charu Wali Khanna. In her plea, she challenged Article 35A of the Indian Constitution and also Section 6 (talks of permanent residents of the state) of the Jammu and Kashmir Constitution.

Also Read: Long pending injustice to Muslim Women! Supreme Court Hearing in India to Decide Validity of Muslim Divorce Practice “Triple Talaq”

The Plea has also challenged a particular provision of the Constitution which denies the right over the property to a woman who marries someone who is from outside the state. This provision which leads the woman to lose rights over property is also applied to her son.


NewsGram is a Chicago-based non-profit media organization. We depend upon support from our readers to maintain our objective reporting. Show your support by Donating to NewsGram. Donations to NewsGram are tax-exempt.
Click here- www.newsgram.com/donate

 

 

Next Story