Connect with us

HW Community

Yug Murder Case Conviction: Is this crime rare enough to invite death penalty?

Published

on

yug murder case judgement

Shimla: The Supreme Court of India, in a decision in Machhi Singh vs State of Punjab case in 1983, had coined the term “rarest of the rare.”

As per Justice MP Thakkar, rarest of the rare case means,

When the collective conscience of the community is so shocked that it will expect the holders of the judicial power center to inflict death penalty irrespective of their personal opinion as regards desirability or otherwise of retaining the death penalty.

Further, the deciding factors included the manner of commission of murder.

When the murder is committed in an extremely brutal, grotesque, diabolical. revolting, or dastardly manner so as to arouse the intense and extreme indignation of the community,

the Apex court had stated.

There are several other guidelines including consideration of aggravating and mitigating factors. However, there has been a long contradiction between the advocates of capital punishment and human rights activists all over the world. 

One of the arguments against the death penalty states that the courts can not give birth to a human hence it doesn’t have the right to take life. The debate also considers the deterrent effect of awarding death penalty on offenders in making. Does it deter people from committing crimes?  

In India, this debate holds more value as the rarest of rare cases are no more rare. The crime rate, especially crime against women is only rising. In 2012, the  gangrape and brutal murder of Nirbhaya in the national capital had sounded the alarm. The accused were given death sentence but the question is whether it deterred criminals or not. 

In Himachal, the debate was again sparked on August 6, 2018, as the district and session judge, Virender Singh found all three accused guilty of abducting and murdering Yug Gupta, a 4-years-old boy, in June 2014. However, the court did not announce the sentence, which is likely to be decided on August 13 – the next date scheduled for the sentencing hearing.

These three convicts include Tejinder Singh (29), Chander Sharma (26), and Vikrant Bakshi (22).

The parents of the murdered boy have been grieving since his abduction on June 14, 2014, from their home in Ram Bazaar, Shimla. Their pain was aggravated by the failure of Shimla Police in solving the case after an investigation of several months. The case was then handed over to the Criminal Investigation Department (CID) of Himachal Pradesh.

Their grief knew no bounds when the CID team recovered parts of Yug’s skeletal from a water tank on August 22, 2016, after a long investigation.

Related Story: Skeleton of missing Shimla kid recovered after 2 years from MC water tank near Bharari

It turned out that said three youth, with an intention to extract a ransom from his family, had abducted Yug. The mastermind Chander was a neighbour of the victim’s family.

Does the crime attract capital punishment?

As per the Supreme Court’s directions in the 1983 Machhi Singh case,
The capital punishment can be imparted in cases

When the victim of murder is an innocent child who could not have or has not provided even an excuse, much less a provocation, for murder.

This criterion also included women or a person rendered helpless by old age or infirmity.

The crime committed in the case of Yug Gupta involve a 4-years-old child who, as per the investigation, was made to live in inhuman conditions after the abduction. The convicts had rented an apartment located at an isolated location near Ram Chandra Chowk. For a week, the child was kept naked in a bed-box, starved, and was made to consume alcohol forcefully to keep him in a sedated state and prevent him from making any noise.

Related Story: Yug Murder Case: Possible torture to death, drowned alive, suggests initial investigation, protest erupts in Shimla

After a week of abduction on June 14, the convicts tied him to a stone with a rope and threw him into a Shimla Municipal Corporation’s water supply tank in Kelston on June 21. Yug was alive when he was thrown into the tank.

The convicts had not asked for ransom until June 27 when the parents received a letter demanding a ransom of Rs. 3.6 crores. However, they had already murdered Yug a week ago.

The recovery of the skeletal remains had sent waves of shock across the state, which was followed by public protests demanding a death penalty for the three convicts.  The Bar Association had also decided to not to take up the case of any of the accused. The case was first-of-its-kind in Himachal Pradesh – a considerably peaceful place as compared to rest of the States.

Everyone found it inconceivable to give an innocent child such horrible death. The convicts were even thrashed by an enraged mob while they were being taken to the court. 

The CID had filed a charge-sheet against the accused on October 25, 2016.

The charge-sheet also included ten reports attached with it.  Two of the reports were that of DNA test conducted to match remains of Yug parents and another report prooving that Yug was alive when the convicts dumped him in the Kelston tank.

About 114 persons are mentioned as the witnesses and statements of over 100 persons have been recorded. All the three accused were booked under sections 302, 201, 342, 364 A and 120 B of the IPC.

The case had indeed shocked the community and it did involve a helpless, innocent child, but it is to be seen whether it qualifies as a rarest of the rare case or not.

In brief, the rarest of the rare crime should consider:

  1. Manner of commission of murder
  2. Motive for commission of murder
  3. Anti-social or socially abhorrent nature of the crime
  4. Magnitude of crime
  5. Personality of victim of murder

Further, in September 2013, a bench of justices S J Mukhopadhaya and Kurian Joseph, while turning a sentence of the death penalty to a man accused of multiple murders into life imprisonment, had noted that the life imprisonment is the rule and death penalty an exception and courts should also consider socio-economic before pronouncing sentence.

 Poverty, socio-economic, psychic compulsions, undeserved adversities in life are some of the mitigating factors which are also required to be considered, in addition to criteria laid down in its two landmark verdicts on the death penalty,  

the bench had stated adding

We may note that the rule is life imprisonment for murder, and death is the exception for which special reasons are to be stated.

There seems to be no socio-economic compulsion in the case of the convicts in the Yug murder case that had compelled them to commit this crime.  The accused are also mentally sound. However, for the court, it would not be that easy to pronounce a death sentence.   

If a death penalty is awarded then, in accordance with the Section 354(3) of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC), the judge would have to cite special reasons for it. 

The family of the Yug has expressed full faith in the judiciary and expects that the court would pronounce nothing less than a death penalty for the brutal murder of Yug.

The recovery of the remains of Yug had also posed serious questions over the cleaning and security of the water supply tanks of the SMC as well as the Irrigation & Public Health Department. The case highlighted that these agencies were not taking any measures to secure these tanks as they were neither locked or monitored in any other way.

The SMC supplied water to the public from this tank for two years until the arrest of the convicts who led the CID team to the spot. The convicts had thrown Yug into the tank in 2014 and it remained inside it up to August 2016, which clearly exposed the lackadaisical approach of government departments towards the quality of drinking water supplied to the public.

The police had also registered an FIR at Sadar Police Station under provisions of Water (Prevention & Control of Pollution) Act 1974 on the basis of the CID’s report. The SMC was charged with a negligent act that could have led to spread of an epidemic or other infections lethal to human life. 

However, the then Mayor of Shimla, Sanjay Chauhan, had questioned CID’s investigations and had claimed that all remains of Yug’s skeleton were recovered from surroundings of the Keleston-based water tank, not from inside. He had alleged Congress and BJP of playing cheap politics over the death of an innocent child.

Madan has studied English Literature and Journalism from HP University and lives in Shimla. He is an amateur photographer and has been writing on topics ranging from environmental, socio-economic, development programs, education, eco-tourism, eco-friendly lifestyle and to green technologies for over 7 years now. He has an inclination for all things green, wonderful and loves to live in solitude. When not writing, he can be seen wandering, trying to capture world around him in his DSLR lens.

HW Community

Parents Burn Fee-Booklet of Shimla’s Private School In Protest, Allege Govt Directions Made No Difference

Published

on

Parents Protest outside auckland house school shimla

Shimla-The written directions issued to all private schools running in Himachal Pradesh from the State Directorate of Higher Education on March 18, 2019, to review their unreasonable and hefty fee structures and reduce unnecessary charges has made no impact on any institution.

This is what the parents alleged on March 22, 2019, while protesting outside the Auckland House School in Shimla. The parents shouted slogans against the fleecing of private schools with unreasonable, hefty fees. They burnt a fee-booklet of the Auckland House School in protest.

Parents protest in Shimla against private schools

The parents have staged multiple protests during the last two to three weeks. The Directorate had to issue a fresh notification to private schools after the student-teacher forum gheraoed its office on March 14, 2019.  

The Directorate had asked the schools to cut down their fees to reasonable amounts, stop the sale of books and uniform in schools or pressurizing parents to purchase them from particular shops. The schools were told that they can’t make it mandatory for students to pay charges for tours/picnics. Further, the Directorate had warned schools of stringent action against if they failed to abide by the provisions of the Private Educational Institute (regulatory) Act, 1997, and Right of Children To Fee and Cumpulsory Education Act, 2009.

Directions Issued on 18 March 2019 by Edu Directorate

Fees-of-Private-Schools-in-Himachal-Pradesh

On Friday, however, the forum alleged that despite the notification issued by the Directorate, private schools did not pay any heed to its warning.  The schools still issued fee booklets without reviewing their fee structures.

The convener of the forum, Vijender Mehra, said that these schools not only ignored the notification but also committed contempt of the State High Court.

The forum has now warned the higher officials of the Education Directorate that if they did not ensure compliance to the court orders, FIRs would be filed personally against them.

The co-convener of the forum, Bindu Joshi, said the Directorate issued written directions to these schools only for the sake of formality. The Government is not showing any interest in the implementation of the Private Educational Institute (Regulatory) Act, 19997, and Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009, she said.

The forum is demanding the formation of a regulatory commission to stop the commercialization of education in the State.

The forum said its series of protests would continue until implementation of the directions issued by the Directorate is ensured.

The voices of protests can be heard in Himachal Pradesh time and again. However, it appears the parents, who are financially squeezed by private schools, wants to fight a final battle to make their unrest heard.

A couple of weeks ago, parents protest in Solan district had forced the St. Luke School, to cut down its fees to half. The student-parent forum is urging all parents to unite in the same way to put some check on the arbitrary working of private schools across the State.

Continue Reading

HW Community

Social Media Platforms Agree to Come up With Code of Ethics, says ECI After a Meeting With Representatives

Published

on

Lok sabha elections 2019 and social media platforms

New Delhi-The usage of Social Media ahead of the Lok Sabha Elections 2019 is one of the biggest causes of worry for the Election Commission of India as well as the people. The social media platforms do not have any provisions like the Model Code of Conduct.

The role of social media in helping spread information as well as curbing misinformation cannot be underestimated. There is a desperate need to come up pro-actively with deterrents like some punitive action against users misusing the platform.

Considering this issue of ethics, the Election Commission of India today had an interactive session with representatives of various Social Media Platforms and Internet and Mobile Association of India (IAMAI). The representatives from social media organizations such as Facebook, Whatsapp, Twitter, Google, ShareChat, TikTok and BigoTV attended the meeting.

The Chief Election Commissioner cited Model Code of Conduct as a unique and historic document, which is followed by all political parties /entities from the date of declaration of schedule of elections till the election process is concluded.

Arora said the Social Media Organizations are formidable force-multiplier and asked them to come up with a similar Code for the ongoing election process in the immediate context and a lasting document in the long run.

Election Commissioner Ashok Lavasa pointed out that today’s has been a momentous meeting for the evolution of ‘behaviour’ of Social Media platforms on Social Media.

Voluntary restraint is a hallmark of civilized society and works as effectively as any regulation, he said. He suggested that the management should consider a clear clause on users’ voluntarily agreeing not to misuse social media platforms for election or political purposes.

The need for the appointment of dedicated grievance channel for expeditious action by the organizations, pre-certification, and transparency in the expenditure of political advertisements was also raised in the meeting. The meeting focused on evolving a notification mechanism by social media platforms for acting upon the violations of Section 126 of R.P. Act, 1951 and preventing misuse of these platforms. 

Continue Reading

HW Community

Manohar Parrikar Was ‘Chief Minister of Commoners’, Says Cabinet condoling his demise

Published

on

Manohar Parrikar Condoloscence messages

New Delhi– The Union Cabinet, chaired by the Prime Minister Narendra Modi, today condoled the sad demise of Manohar Parrikar, Chief Minister on March 17, 2019, at Panaji, Goa.  The Cabinet observed silence for two minutes in his memory.  Parrikar had been in and out of hospitals since February last year after he was diagnosed with pancreatic cancer.

He was cremated with full state honours at Panjim’s Miramar Beach this evening. He was 64-years-old.

The Cabinet had also approved observing one day of mourning by the Government of India and flying the National Flag at half-mast on March 18, 2019, in all the States/UTs Capitals including Delhi and throughout the State of Goa.

The Cabinet expresses profound sorrow at the sad demise of Shri Manohar Parrikar, Chief Minister of Goa in the evening of 17th March 2019 at Panaji, Goa. In his passing away, the country has lost a veteran and distinguished leader, affectionately called as the Chief Minister of commoners,

said a condolence Resolution of the Cabinet.

The President of India, Ram Nath Kovind, also condoled the passing away of Parrikar.

Extremely sorry to hear of the passing of Shri Manohar Parrikar, Chief Minister of Goa, after an illness borne with fortitude and dignity. An epitome of integrity and dedication in public life, his service to the people of Goa and of India will not be forgotten.

the President said

About Manohar Parrikar


Born on December 13, 1955, at Mapusa, Goa, Parrikar was educated at Loyola School, Margao and later graduated in Metallurgical Engineering from the Indian Institute of Technology, Mumbai in 1978. Before entering politics, Parrikar had joined the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) at a young age and became a Mukhya Shikshak (Chief Instructor) in the final years of his schooling itself. After graduating from IIT, he resumed RSS work in Mapusa and became a Sanghchalak at the age of 26.

As a member of the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), Parrikar was elected to the Legislative Assembly of Goa in 1994. He became the Chief Minister of Goa for the first time on 24th October 2000 and continued till 27th February 2002. He was re-elected as Chief Minister on 3rd June 2002 and served till 2nd February 2005.  He became Chief Minister of Goa for the third time on 9th March 2012 and continued till 8th November 2014. On 9th November 2014, Shri Parrikar became Union Minister of Defence and continued till 13th March 2017, he was again sworn in as Chief Minister of Goa on 14th March 2017.

He is credited with the building of modern Goa and to the modernization of India’s Armed Forces as well as improvement to the lives of ex.-Servicemen.

Parrikar was awarded the ‘Distinguished Alumnus Award’ by IIT Mumbai in 2001, Honorary Doctorate by National Institute of Technology, Goa in 2018, and the Dr. S.P. Mukherjee Award in 2018, among others. He is survived by his two sons.

Continue Reading

Trending