4 Nirbhaya convicts may hang on Mar 20

Aamir.khan2@timesgroup.com

New Delhi:06.03.2020

A court on Thursday set March 20 as the date for executing the four convicts in the 2012 Nirbhaya gangrape and murder case. The court noted that it has an obligation to set the date, and there was no legal bar.

The latest ruling follows three postponements of the hanging and adds a sense of finality in a sensational case in which the four had received the death sentence in 2013. “Death warrants issued by this court with respect to condemned convicts Mukesh, Pawan, Akshay and Vinay shall now be carried into effect by hanging the convicts by the neck until they are dead on March 20 at 5.30 am,” said additional sessions judge Dharmender Rana. Special prosecutor Irfan Ahmed, who had moved a plea seeking setting the date of hanging, told the court the convicts had exhausted all legal remedies.

Hearing on separate hanging on Mar 23

The SC on Thursday deferred to March 23 the hearing on the Centre’s plea to allow separate execution where there are more than one death row convicts. The apex court rejected the Nirbhaya convicts’ plea for a hearing before March 20.

‘No legal hurdle before judge Rana to set date of hanging’

Convict Pawan Gupta was the last convict in the case to exhaust the legal remedy of the President’s mercy. Rejection of his mercy plea brought an end to all judicial, Constitutional and administrative remedies to which a prisoner is entitled as a right before execution of death sentence.

Appearing for Pawan, Vinay and Akshay, advocate A P Singh said he would be meeting Pawan and then challenge the rejection of mercy plea. While he also wanted to meet Akshay to “discuss with him the future course of action”, he conceded that there was no legal obstacle before judge Rana to set the date of hanging. He also prayed that the jail authorities be directed to permit the convicts to meet their counsels.

When it was urged that Akshay be informed about the status of his second mercy petition, the court stated that the jail superintendent was duty-bound to do it. Judge Rana was of the view that the lawyers were at liberty to meet their clients as per the standard procedure of jail after complying with the formalities.