Shimla:The CBI on Tuesday demanded capital punishment for the Gudiya rape and murder case convict as the argument on the quantum of sentence was held before Session and Spl CBI judge Shimla Rajeev Bhardwaj here.
Arguing for the victim CBI Spl prosecutor (in virtual hearing) Mr Amit Jindal demanded Capital punishment to the convict stating that crime committed falls in the ' rarest of the rare " category.
Mr Jindal said that convict have previous criminal antecedents as he is habitual offenders being a history-sheeter also deserve the capital punishment.
Justifying the case fit for the capital punishment the CBI counsel said that convict was held guilty under sec 376 (2)(i), 376 (A), and 302 of the Indian Penal Code should be given the capital punishment provided under the sections. Moreover, he also deserve maximum punishment under section 4 of the POCSO Act which is not less than life imprisonment.
Defense counsel or Legal aid of accused Mr Mohinder Singh Thakur (appeared physically in presence of convict Nilu) told UNI that he opposed the CBI argument on the basis of various mitigating circumstances. Moreover, the CBI could not establish any aggravating circumstance argument to justify the cold-blooded crime.
Mr Thakur said that court holding the convict guilty in the case mainly relied upon the circumstantial evidences as CBI could not present any direct or eyewitness of the crime. Therefore, demanding capital punishment is not justified.
The Defense counsel also argued that crime committed by the convict was not cold-blooded and premeditated or predetermined. It happened in the spur of movement and hence does not fall in the rarest of the rare category.
Mr Thakur said as convict committed the crime after consuming liquor and his mental condition was not normal, capital punishment should not be awarded to him.
Countering the argument that convict has previous antecedents of crime should not be considered as a valid reason for the capital punishment, the defense counsel said, adding that decision should not be taken on the basis of crime committed by him in the previous cases or considering his criminal background.
'' The capital punishment or quantum of punishment should be decided on the basis of basis of rehabilitation and reformation condition of convicts . Since the accused remained in the custody for three to four years and prosecution did not present any evidence that his custodial behavior was not satisfactory. ''
'' SC states emphatically that capital punishment should be given if convict or accused behavior is not satisfactory in the custody and he could not be reformed in the custody. '' the defense stated before the court.
After hearing arguments of both party in the case court has fixed next date for deciding the quantum of punishment on Jun 18 after hearing the argument in the case.(UNI)
