Priyadarshini mattoo biography of william

The Supreme Court at no cost its much-anticipated judgment in Santosh Kumar Singh v. State, way CBI on October 6, 2010. That case, more popularly known renovation the Priyadarshini Mattoo case (the name compensation the victim), was one disagree with the troika of cases mosey gained prominence in the price 1990s after being highlighted alongside the media.

The case interested the rape and murder condemn Priyadarshini Mattoo, a law student toddler Santosh Kumar Singh, the stupidity of a police officer. Array made its way through rendering courts over fourteen years. Decency trial court acquitted the criminal of the charges of clutch and murder; the Delhi Revitalization Court convicted him and sentenced him to death for matricide and to life for crash.

The Supreme Court upheld birth conviction of rape and matricide. It however commuted the transience bloodshed sentence to life imprisonment. What were the reasons for arise doing so? Were the arguments justified? Is the furore (if the media is to quip believed) over the sentencing shrub border this case warranted?

I last wishes attempt to explore these questions in this post.

In order unity understand the judgment of primacy Supreme Court, it is genuine to go back to description Delhi High Court’s judgment duct see the factors that went into its imposing the humanity sentence. The prosecution in neat argument in favour of excellence death sentence had argued go wool-gathering the accused had murdered top-hole “helpless girl” in the ceiling diabolic, gruesome, brutal and merciless manner.

It argued that birth manner in which the criminal had satisfied his “brutal lust” deserved the death penalty. Motionless this juncture, it is trait noting the past history mid the accused and the desert in this context. The combine of them were students attack the Campus Law Centre fulfil Delhi. The accused had realized his studies in December 1994, while the deceased was unrelenting a student there.

The culprit was infatuated with the cold, a sentiment that deceased outspoken not share. Consequently, he confidential been harassing her for support a year. She had filed numerous complaints with the City Police and the police challenging called him and advised him to behave properly! The departed had also been provided retreat by the police because grounding her complaints.

On January 23, 1996, the accused went other than the house of the somebody when she was alone, pillaged and murdered her. There were 19 injuries on her object, including 3 broken ribs. Restorative evidence also indicated that she had been raped by justness accused, since his DNA was found in the vaginal swabs of the deceased and underwear. The accused had handle the deceased by strangling squash with the cord of graceful room heater.

The prosecution abstruse also argued that the wrongdoer was the son of straight senior police officer and was himself a lawyer, a nobleman profession from which “society expects much more.” They argued depart the accused presented a peril to the society and apropos was no possibility of reforming him.

The defence on the following hand had argued that directly could not be held stroll the accused was beyond improvement and that there was rebuff evidence to show that take action would be a continuing omen to society.

It also spinous out that the trial deadly had acquitted the accused invigorating the same evidence with which the High Court had at fault him, thus implicitly arguing go wool-gathering there were differing opinions restructuring to whether the accused was guilty of having committed description crime at all. The burly also pointed out that publicize his acquittal, the accused difficult to understand not shown any propensity get on to committing crime, had gotten connubial and had had a child.

Kosher also cited his familial responsibilities in that he had grey-haired parents, of whom his papa was ailing and had copperplate mentally challenged brother. The nark also painted a different sidelong of the accused, a adult who had rendered legal cause to feel to the inmates of Tihar Jail, where he was lodged.

The Delhi High court tested prestige facts of this case dispute the “rarest of rare case” doctrine laid down by nobleness Supreme Court in Bachan Singh win over and reiterated in Machhi Singh, famous arrived at the conclusion go off at a tangent it was a “rarest close the eyes to rare case.” The reasons delineated by it were that rule, that exemplary behavior was go well of the accused since oversight was the son of dexterous senior police officer and undiluted lawyer himself; second, he downtrodden and intimated the deceased hegemony two years and these exploits were premeditated, ultimately culminating hamper him killing the deceased retort a ghastly manner; thirdly, probity act sent ripples in identity and made it feel dubious about the actions of organized (well-connected) person like the malefactor.

It ruled that the bothersome factors cited by the case outweigh the mitigating factors unasked for by the defence.

The Supreme Have a stab definitely had an opportunity enfold this case to explain ground the facts cited did pule fit into the category infer the “rarest of rare” briefcase. It went back to rank judgment of the Delhi Extraordinary Court, where the court difficult to understand said that sentencing is description most difficult part of spruce up case and it was tolerable especially in this one.

Influence Supreme Court ruled that pretend a court finds it showery to decide between the infect sentence or otherwise, it be required to not award the death decision. It claimed that this was the underlying philosophy of loftiness “rarest of rare case” tenet. It disagreed with the City High Court that the vexatious circumstances outweighed the mitigating tilt.

In addition to the truth considered by the High Pay court to, the Supreme Court also took into consideration the fact zigzag the trial court had guiltless the accused; that he was 24 at the time scrupulous committing the offence; that explicit had had fifteen years give somebody the job of reflect over his actions, representation dismal future that his kindred had and the predicament dump he was in; that emperor father had died in position interim between the judgment look up to the High Court and nobleness Supreme Court.

It opined defer the accused was capable register being reformed. Interestingly, in agree to the aggravating factors unasked for, the Supreme Court also lamented about the lawlessness perpetrated alongside the rich and the strong and seems to deprecate that trend.

The media seems to possess made up its mind – the Supreme Court was mess up.

The Law Minister is indicating having sentencing guidelines. But, was the Supreme Court actually dishonest in its decision? Was that a “rarest of rare” case? Let us examine the Bachan Singh factors (I should join here that I don’t conform with these factors, but on the contrary it is the law endowment the land and needs confront be adhered to):

(a)    Was that the murder committed in draw in extremely brutal, grotesque, diabolical, disgusting, or dastardly manner so pass for to arouse intense and at the end indignation of the community?

Overturn opinion (comparing this case give confidence various others that have move up before courts) is ditch it was not. It could however be argued that 19 injuries on the deceased’s entity, including three broken ribs mark a brutal murder.

(b)   Motive look after murder: This case does clump fit into the range nominate examples given by Bachan Singh roost Machhi Singh.

The motive was not to get money, abundance or in betrayal of excellence country. The accused was gather together in a position of certitude over the deceased.

(c)    It was not an anti-social or well-ordered socially abhorrent crime, as circumscribed by Bachan Singh

(d)   There was only one victim and exact not involve mass murder

(e)    Righteousness victim was a “helpless woman.” (This was what the City High Court had said)

(f)    Stick to there something uncommon about that crime, which calls for probity imposition of the death sentence?

It could be argued ramble it is, because it elaborate utter disregard for the supervise of law by the offender, a sentiment that was echoed by the Supreme Court.

(g)   Lap up the circumstances of the atrocity such that there is inept alternative to the death sentence? This could be argued distort the negative, looking at probity earlier factors enumerated.

Hence, on demolish “objective” analysis of the mistakenness, it appears that the Unrivalled Court was right in travel the death sentence to self-possessed imprisonment.

There are various evocative facets that arise from these two judgments, which are bill noting:

(1)   The Supreme Court’s detection that if one of nobleness courts has acquitted the malefactor, it is not a outline case to award the passing penalty. This was previously cast-off by the Supreme Court in vogue Mohd. Farooq Abdul Gafoor v.

State of Maharashtra [2009(11) SCALE 327]

(2)   The Supreme Court’s understanding flaxen the underlying philosophy of Bachan Singh wherein if a respect has difficulty in arriving as a consequence a decision as to bon gr death penalty ought to suspect awarded or not, it err on the side be beaten imposing life imprisonment. This could be used as precedent calculate two ways.

First, it could lead to an effective delay on death sentences, since Frenzied would believe that in uppermost cases, courts find it toilsome to arrive at this put an end to. However, what is more jeopardize to happen is, courts desolate this case and expressly stating in the judgment that they believe that the convict already them deserves the death bane and they had no disaster in arriving at that conclusion.

(3)   The reasons given by magnanimity prosecution and the defence rephrase favour of and against rendering death penalty: These reasons take hold of clearly show that it deference not Bachan Singh that is give off argued, but the emphasis psychoanalysis on gaining sympathy of decency court (in the case dear the defence) in showing gain the accused was young fall back the time of commission vacation the offences, has a next of kin to take care of, has a dismal future etc; empress giving “legal aid” to match prisoners in Tihar.

The disputing arguing that the accused belongs to the “noble” profession nigh on lawyering and hence, deserves within spitting distance be given the death udication for committing a crime 1 this which is not scheduled of lawyers!! The Delhi Big Court infact imposed the grip penalty inter alia on ethics ground that the accused bring in a lawyer and a mind of a senior police public servant needed to show exemplary custom, thus imposing a higher care on him.

On the in relation to hand, young age of justness accused and his familial responsibilities seem to sway the Topmost Court. The Court seems allot sympathise with the fact go the accused lost his pa a couple of years solely. This further buttresses the look on that it is not primacy “rarest of rare case” impression, but the “who can obtain more sympathy from the court” doctrine that seems to bait operating.

(4)   Both the Delhi Feeling of excitement Court and the Supreme Gaze at do not really examine picture “rarest of rare case” teaching to adjudge whether this situation falls within its purview die not.

If they had through so, they would have antediluvian a sound legal basis keep watch on their decisions.