Supreme Court Advocates for Childcare and Feeding Rooms in Public Spaces

Image
Supreme Court Advocates for Childcare and Feeding Rooms in Public Spaces The Supreme Court of India has suggested that the Union Government develop a comprehensive policy addressing the construction of feeding rooms and childcare facilities  in public places. This move aims to ensure that nursing mothers and their children can access basic amenities in a dignified and private manner, reinforcing their fundamental rights under the Indian Constitution. SC Encourages Policy Formulation A bench comprising Justice BV Nagarathna  and Justice N Kotiswar Singh  highlighted the absence of a structured framework to address this pressing issue. The court advised the Centre to propose a policy that could then be implemented across the states, scheduling the next hearing for December 10, 2024.   The apex court emphasized that before issuing formal directions, it was crucial to understand the Centre’s perspective on implementing the petitioner’s demand for childcare and feedi...
Post a Comment

Delhi HC Refuses to Suspend Sentence of Former BJP MLA Senger in Unnao Rape Victim's Father's Custodial Death Case

Delhi HC Refuses to Suspend Sentence of Former BJP MLA Senger in Unnao Rape Victim's Father's Custodial Death Case



The Delhi High Court on Friday dismissed the plea of former BJP MLA Kuldeep Singh Sengar, seeking suspension of his sentence during the appeal against his conviction. Sengar is currently serving a 10-year sentence in connection with the custodial death of the father of a rape victim from Unnao, Uttar Pradesh. He has been in custody since April 13, 2018.


Background of the Case


Kuldeep Singh Sengar, along with other accused, was convicted by the Tis Hazari Court in 2018. Sengar is also serving a life sentence for the rape of a minor, stemming from FIRs filed in 2018 at Police Station Makhi, Unnao. These cases were adjudicated by the District and Sessions Judge (West) at Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi.


High Court's Ruling


Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma dismissed Sengar’s plea for suspension of sentence during the pendency of the appeal. The High Court acknowledged that Sengar has served six out of the ten years of his imprisonment. However, the court emphasized that the period undergone by a convict is just one factor among several others, such as the gravity of the offense, the nature of the crime, and the impact on public confidence in the judicial system.


Legal Considerations


The High Court noted that the presumption of innocence is erased once the accused has been found guilty. Therefore, in applications seeking suspension of sentence, courts take a prima facie view of the role of the accused and the gravity of the offense as recorded in the conviction judgment. Justice Sharma emphasized that the arguments on the merits of the appeal would be addressed on August 7, depending on how much time the counsels for the co-accused take.


Arguments and Counterarguments


Sengar's counsel argued that the appellant had been in custody since April 13, 2018, and had not misused the liberty granted to him during a brief interim suspension for his daughter’s marriage. The counsel highlighted that Sengar had already served almost six years of his ten-year sentence and that other co-accused who had served more than half of their imprisonment had been granted suspension of sentence.


In contrast, Advocate Ravi Sharma, Special Public Prosecutor (SPP), opposed the plea, arguing that Sengar was a key person in the commission of the offense. The SPP pointed out that Sengar's conviction was for causing the death of a witness in a rape case, highlighting the gravity and seriousness of the crime.


Details of the Offense


The background of the case dates back to June 4, 2017, when the minor daughter of the victim was allegedly raped by Sengar after being enticed on the pretext of getting a job. On April 3, 2018, the victim's father was brutally assaulted by the accused in broad daylight while traveling to Unnao for a court hearing. He was later arrested and allegedly succumbed to injuries inflicted during police custody on April 9, 2018.


Transfer of Trial and Protection Orders


The Supreme Court transferred the trial of five related cases from Uttar Pradesh to Delhi on August 1, 2019, and directed the trial to be concluded within 45 days. The apex court also provided protection to the minor rape victim, her lawyer, mother, and other immediate family members, a protection that remains in place to date.


Legal Implications and Future Proceedings


The refusal to suspend Sengar’s sentence underscores the judicial system’s stance on the gravity of the crime and the importance of maintaining public confidence. The next hearing on the merits of the appeal is scheduled for August 7, which will be crucial in determining the future course of this high-profile case.


Conclusion


The Delhi High Court's decision highlights the complex balance between individual rights and public interest in the judicial process. As the case progresses, it will continue to draw significant attention, reflecting the judiciary's commitment to addressing grave offenses with the seriousness they warrant.

Location: Pune, Maharashtra, India

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Supreme Court Reinforces Due Process: Curbing “Bulldozer Justice” with Strict Guidelines

Image
Supreme Court Reinforces Due Process: Curbing “Bulldozer Justice” with Strict Guidelines Background In a significant judgment, the Supreme Court of India has set out guidelines to curb arbitrary demolitions, commonly referred to as "bulldozer justice." This term has emerged from instances where properties of individuals accused of crimes have been demolished without following due legal process. The ruling responds to several petitions highlighting the destruction of residential and commercial properties without prior notice, which, according to petitioners, targets marginalized and minority communities. Key Principles Addressed The Supreme Court’s decision rests on critical constitutional principles, particularly the rule of law, separation of powers, and protection of individual rights . The Court emphasized that no person should be punished without due process and that arbitrary action by the executive undermines citizens’ trust in the justice system. Justice Gavai, in del...
Read more

Delhi High Court Grants Bail to Former Bank Manager Accused of Defrauding Woman of ₹13 Crores

Image
Delhi High Court Grants Bail to Former Bank Manager  Accused of Defrauding Woman of ₹13 Crores  The Delhi High Court has granted bail to Varun Vashista , a former bank manager accused of embezzling over ₹13 crores from a customer’s account while working at ICICI Bank's Vikas Puri branch. The bail was approved by Justice Amit Mahajan on November 12, 2024, after considering the evidence and facts of the case.   Details of the Case The allegations against Vashista stem from his role as a branch manager. The complainant and her husband had entrusted him with managing their investments, amounting to ₹13.5 crores, between 2019 and 2023.   The complainant discovered in January 2024 that nearly ₹12 crores had been **siphoned off** from her account. Key allegations include:   - Creation of Fake Fixed Deposits: The accused reportedly created fraudulent fixed deposit accounts in the complainant’s name.   - Misappropriation of Funds: Funds were tr...
Read more

Equality Before Law

Image
                            Equality Before Law                                                   Introduction The rule of law was firstly introduced by A.V. Dicey in  his book "The Constitution Of England" in which there is rule which only prevails is law in which all are equal. In simple word if any wrong is being done which is not justifiable  by law committed by anyone that may be president, prime minister, or any individual are punishable because there is supremacy of law. Supremacy of law means the government which is power or the people who elected the government all will be treated equally before law.  Article 14 The Indian Constitution 1949, Article 14 guarantees "Equality before law The State shall not deny to any person equality before the law or the...
Read more