Juvenile accused in gangrape faces robbery charge too

The Delhi Police on Thursday filed a chargesheet in the Juvenile Board relating to a robbery case against the juvenile accused in the Delhi gangrape case.

According to police, the six men accused of the brutal gangrape of a 23-year-old paramedic student, also stand accused of robbing vegetable seller Ramadhar Singh at Hauz Khas, before assaulting the woman and her male friend aboard a moving bus on December 16.

The chargesheet against the five adult accused in the case will be filed in the Saket court in the coming days, sources said.

The gangrape case is being heard in the special fast-track court of additional sessions judge Yogesh Khanna.

Separate proceedings are being held in the Juvenile Justice Board against the juvenile accused, who was held to be 17 years and six months of age by the Board.

The chargesheet against him, known as police inquiry report (PIR), relates to the role of the juvenile in the robbery incident.

Police also filed a supplementary PIR in the gangrape case against the accused juvenile before the JJB on Thursday.

While the media is not allowed to publish the details of the proceedings in the JJB, it has been learnt that the Board, presided over by Principal Magistrate Geetanjali Goel, has taken cognisance of the chargesheets.

The Board will take up both the PIRs for arguments on framing of charges on February 28.

Source: http://www.indianexpress.com/news/juvenile-accused-in-gangrape-faces-robbery-charge-too/1074543/

Delhi gangrape victim's family wants death for all accused

The family of Delhi gangrape victim on Friday said it would not want anything less than death sentence for all the accused, including the minor, and urged the Central government to amend the law in this connection.

The offer of a government job to one in the family by the Delhi government was turned down by the victim's brother.

"The family would never accept that the person who played a major role in the crime is let off with a mere punishment of three years only because he has the excuse that he is a minor," the grandfather of the 23-year-old victim said.

The family would urge the Central government to amend the law in this connection, he said.

The brother of the deceased, on phone from Delhi, said the offer of the Delhi government of government job to one in the family had been turned down and Chief Minister Sheila Dikshit has been informed of this.

The brother said as of now he is only an intermediate and so would not get a good job.

He said Dikshit had assured him of admission into an engineering course.

The brother said his family had full faith that the medical examination would prove him (minor accused) to be a major and pave way for the sternest of punishment.

The family wants that all the accused are given death sentence, he said.

The demand for amendment of the law comes in the backdrop of The Justice Verma Committee recommending life for gangrape but no death penalty.

Source: http://www.indianexpress.com/news/delhi-gangrape-victims-family-wants-death-for-all-accused/1064801/

Lawyers squabble, each says he represents gangrape accused

Two lawyers for the accused in the Delhi gangrape case on Tuesday traded charges in the Supreme Court on Tuesday, each claiming he “validly” represents one of the accused who wants the trial shifted out of Delhi.

The drama unfolded before a three-judge bench led by Chief Justice Altamas Kabir when the court was about to rise for the lunch break. Since the bench was supposed to sit until 1 pm, it was understood that the petition by advocate M L Sharma, on behalf of accused Mukesh, will not be taken up for hearing on Tuesday.

Mukesh has sought transfer of trial to Mathura in Uttar Pradesh or any state outside Delhi, citing fears of not getting a fair trial because of the media pressure and attitude of the state.

Sharma requested the bench to urgently hear the matter since a fast track court has initiated legal proceedings. Cutting him short, another lawyer V K Anand, who also represents some of the other accused in the case, claimed that Sharma did not merit an audience in the matter because Mukesh had chosen him as his lawyer.

Sharma hit back saying Anand’s arguments were “baseless”, that he could not be allowed to jump into the fray on the basis of frivolous claims. Anand, however, said he had a “valid” vakalatnama to prove that Mukesh had engaged him to appear in the case.

While the two lawyers levelled allegations at each other, the bench said it would hear them only on Wednesday and they could put forth all their contentions then. On Monday, the court had accepted Sharma’s request for urgent hearing of the transfer petition and directed the registry to list the matter. Mukesh is one of the six accused of raping a woman on a moving bus on December 16. She died in a Singapore hospital on December 29.