•  •  Dark Mode

Your Interests & Preferences

I am a...

law firm lawyer
in-house company lawyer
litigation lawyer
law student
aspiring student

Website Look & Feel

 •  •  Dark Mode
Blog Layout

Save preferences

Court Cuts: When ML Sharma's boast of having read Mahabharat backfired before Justice Misra

In the ongoing hearing of appeals by the four convicts in the 2012 Jyoti Singh Delhi rape and murder case in court No 4 in the Supreme Court yesterday afternoon, convict Mukesh’s controversial counsel, ML Sharma, was making submissions on the evidentiary value of DNA

Remaining unconvinced by the materials Sharma cited on DNA as evidence and how this has led to acquittals in the US, Justice Dipak Misra asked Sharma whether he believed Charles Darwin.

After some hesitation, Sharma admitted that he did not believe in Darwin, but believed only in Ramayan and Mahabharat.

The answer surprised Misra, who apparently expected him to say something on Darwin, as he had been making submissions on the value of DNA as a scientific evidence in the criminal investigation in the Nirbhaya case.

But instead Sharma had presented Misra with an opportunity to test Sharma’s knowledge of the Mahabharat at some later point.

The opportunity came not much later, when Sharma told the bench that the convict Mukesh was unlikely to have committed rape, in front of his own brother, Ram Singh (who committed suicide in Tihar jail during the trial).

Sharma claimed this was because it was unnatural for a brother to commit a sexual act in front of his brother.

Justice Misra immediately asked Sharma that since he claimed that he knew the Mahabharat, how would he explain the action of Duryodhan, who disrobed Draupadi in front of his brothers and in full view of everyone, without any shame.

This seemed to have caught Sharma unaware, and he continued in his submissions without responding to Justice Misra.

Click to show 1 comment
at your own risk
By reading the comments you agree that they are the (often anonymous) personal views and opinions of readers, which may be biased and unreliable, and for which Legally India therefore has no liability. If you believe a comment is inappropriate, please click 'Report to LI' below the comment and we will review it as soon as practicable.