Texan Posted September 9, 2014 Posted September 9, 2014 Case in question: Nithari serial murders Chronology of events: 2005 - 2006 : Several young children go missing in and around Nithari in Noida. 2009 - 2010 : Surinder Koli is found guilty of murder in several cases related to missing children and awarded the death penalty by trial courts and upheld by a High Court Feb 2011 : Supreme Court upholds the death sentence July 2014 : President rejects the mercy petition of the said convict Sept 2014 : GOI about to execute capital punishment Sept 2014 : Just one day before the execution of the capital punishment, the same Supreme Court, which had upheld the death sentence, passes a last minute order to stay the execution. ---- This is not an isolated case. Now, all prisoners that are facing the death penalty can have their cases reviewed again by an Open court. I know the Courts are usually not averse to criticism of their decisions, but this seems to be a clear case of mockery of justice. When you have already upheld the decision to carry out capital punishment, what is the need to review it again in the same court? The convict has already exhausted all options for appeal (which are quite exhaustive in India). So, why do you want to keep delaying the implementation? In the past, we had a President who was reluctant to act of mercy petitions. Unfortunately, our constitution does not provide any time limit for the President to act on these. Now that we have a President who is acting on these petitions, the Supreme Court is intervening. Unfortunately, unjustified delays in dispensing justice tend to foster the belief that "Justice delayed is justice denied". -- Did you know that India has the largest backlog of cases in the world? And that some analysts estimate that it will take 466 years just to clear the backlog?
CSK Fan Posted September 9, 2014 Posted September 9, 2014 I don't mind this in cases of death sentences. But in all other cases agree with the justice denied part
Detonator Posted September 9, 2014 Posted September 9, 2014 Agree with the OP. A person who never cares about other's lives have no right to live.
rkt.india Posted September 9, 2014 Posted September 9, 2014 Surendra Koli comes out as mentally unstable in his Narco analysis test.
zubinpepsi Posted September 9, 2014 Posted September 9, 2014 i find it strange that the other guy who was his partner or boss got acquitted... hows tht possible
Texan Posted September 9, 2014 Author Posted September 9, 2014 I don't mind this in cases of death sentences. But in all other cases agree with the justice denied part What is the point of the Supreme Court contradicting its own decision to uphold the sentence? It is an unnecessary step and diverts resources away from other cases. Don't forget - there are thousands of people awaiting justice from these courts.
Malcolm Merlyn Posted September 10, 2014 Posted September 10, 2014 The SC recently changed its procedure and said that any death sentence appeal has to be heard by 3 judges and not 2.Since Kolis case was heard by 2 judges he appealed and got a stay.
Recommended Posts