Nirbhaya Case: Sessions Judge Directs Tihar Authorities To Submit Detailed Report On Steps Taken Post Filing Of Mukesh's Mercy Plea
story
Sessions Judge Satish Arora at Patiala House Court on Thursday asked Tihar Administration to file a report mentioning the steps taken by them, after the filing of mercy plea by one of the convicts.The court has asked the authorities at Tihar to intimate the court about the procedure followed under Rule 840, read along with Rule 863, of the Delhi Prison Rules, 2019.The direction has come after...
Your free access to Live Law has expired
Please Subscribe for unlimited access to Live Law Archives, Weekly/Monthly Digest, Exclusive Notifications, Comments, Ad Free Version, Petition Copies, Judgement/Order Copies.
Sessions Judge Satish Arora at Patiala House Court on Thursday asked Tihar Administration to file a report mentioning the steps taken by them, after the filing of mercy plea by one of the convicts.
The court has asked the authorities at Tihar to intimate the court about the procedure followed under Rule 840, read along with Rule 863, of the Delhi Prison Rules, 2019.
The direction has come after an application was filed by Advocate Vrinda Grover seeking a stay on the date of execution set by the court by an order dated January 7, 2020.
In that order, the court had scheduled the date of execution to be January 22, 7 am.
In today's hearing, Miss Grover informed the court that she's not challenging the legality of the order passed by this court on January 7.
She submitted that all that she's arguing is that the scheduled date of execution, as mentioned in that order, has become non-executable as the Petitioner Mukesh has already filed his mercy plea.
As per her submissions, the mercy plea of Mukesh is pending before two authorities: Lieutenant Governor of Delhi, and the President of India.
I'm furtherance of her plea, she cited the judgment of the Supreme Court in Shatrughan Chauhan v. Union of India, as well as Rules 840 and 863 of the Delhi Prison Manual, to argue that the Petitioner can't be executed without being given a notice of minimum 14 days after the rejection of the mercy plea.
The argument regarding the stipulation of the 14 days period to start post the rejection of the mercy plea, was also agreed upon by the Prosecutor.
Therefore, it had become amply clear during the proceedings, that the Petitioner can't be executed on the scheduled date of January 22.
The court was also informed by the Tihar Authorities that they've sought further orders from the Delhi Government on the issue of staying the execution date, as per Rule 840 of the Prison Manual.
However, the court was not satisfied by their intimation. The judge was also dissatisfied by the fact that the authorities had to wait for an application to be moved by a death row convict, in order to inform the court about the subsequent developments in his legal redressal.
It was also observed that the very fact that the High Court had granted liberty to the Petitioner to approach the Sessions Court, goes on to show that the said court wanted the Sessions Court to be aware of the subsequent developments in the case.
Having made such observations, the court directed the Tihar Authorities to submit a complete report regarding the steps taken by them under Rule 840, read along with Rule 863, of the Delhi Prison Rules, 2018.