The Delhi High Court on Thursday declined to immediately revoke the ban on the telecast of controversial BBC documentary "India's Daughter" on the December 16, 2012, gang rape.
A division bench of Justice BD. Ahmed and Justice Sanjeev Sachdeva posted the two public interest litigations (PILs) for revocation of the ban on the documentary's telecast for March 18 before the bench headed by Chief Justice G Rohini.
The bench refused to pass any interim order in the case, saying let the case come before the roaster bench of the Delhi High Court chief justice.
During the hearing, the bench said it has "no problem" about airing the documentary but the case (appeals of convicts against death sentence) is pending before the Supreme Court.
"Prima facie, we are not opposed to airing the documentary, but the matter is pending in the Supreme Court. Let the Supreme Court decide the matter first," bench remarked.
In its order, the bench posted the pleas for March 18. It said: "Show us how this documentary would not be interfering with judicial system. We are not roaster bench. Let the matter come before chief justice, we are not giving any interim order."
The documentary is about the gang rape of a 23-year-old trainee physiotherapist, who was brutally assaulted on December 16, 2012, in a moving bus in Delhi. It kicked up a storm after one of the convicts Mukesh Singh was interviewed in Delhi's Tihar Jail.
The documentary also has comments from the convicts' counsel AP. Singh and ML. Sharma, who allegedly made derogatory remarks against women. The documentary caused an uproar among a section of people in India after the government banned its telecast in all formats.
During the hearing, the government opposed the pleas saying the "documentary not suitable for unrestricted public view".
In the documentary, derogatory comments about the victim and women were made, government counsel added.
The PILs said the ban on the documentary was in clear violation of fundamental rights under Article 19 of the Constitution. They sought direction to declare as illegal the act of banning the documentary by the home ministry, the ministry of information and broadcasting, and the Delhi Police commissioner.
The trial court had on March 4 banned until further orders the broadcast of the documentary. The pleas also sought direction for the Supreme Court registry to constitute a three-judge special bench to hear the appeals of the four death row convicts, pending since August 25, 2014.
The Supreme Court in July put on hold the execution of the four convicts in the case.
As per social media, the public at large wanted to see the documentary, as within a day of it being put up on YouTube, it was viewed by more 2.86 lakh people, the pleas said.
threads most popular
thread most upvoted
comment newest
first oldest
first
It has been banned because it reports on Indian cultural and social misogyny and reports on the fact that 250 MPs at one time were accused of serious crimes including rape. It exposes the fact that the rapists came from within Indian society and were not a rare aberration. The interviews with the police psychiatrist & Shiela Dixit touched on this aspect.
The Park Street Rape survivor Suzette Jordan has died of multi organ failure within days of a film on her rape getting censor approval. A very convenient death of an inconvenient woman. I would not be surprised if she was poisoned and murdered. Hospitals, doctors and the police are known to cover up. An autopsy is needed in her case.
Also read about the shocking Kamduni gangrape. Violent and brutal gangrapes in India are not rare, its just that the Delhi case got a lot of attention.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2013_Kamduni_gang_rape_and_murder_case
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2013_Kamduni_gang_rape_and_murder_case
And if it was a conspiracy to frame these guys, who actually did it? Some powerful politician? Very unlikely and too many loose ends to such a story.
The whole prosecution case hinged on connecting the bus to the incident and connecting Ram Singh, Mukesh Singh & Co. to the bus and the police case on this was very flimsy.
The pressure to solve the case ASAP was immense and the police solved it too fast.
These men could have been framed, or the version of events doctored somewhat. Who knows.
Its not necessary that a powerful politician was involved. It could have been any rich kid.
Or the police (read the State) just decided to find some scapegoats to "solve" the case in order to bring the street agitations to an end.
The accused were dispensable people socially.
You could be right and it could be them. I don't know the truth.
But there are holes in the police case, in the boyfriend's statements, and the trial and defence legal representation were a joke.
But unless you assume that DNA, dental, bus, alibi, eyewitness and all other evidence was doctored, without the parents or friend or media creating a fuss about such an elaborate frame-up, and in the absence of any credible alternative theory, it is overwhelmingly likely that they did in fact do it.
The trial was secret. This was unnecessary and also against law & public policy.
The accused did not have proper legal representation, at times one or more accused had no legal representation even during the trial, and lawyers were thrust upon the accused by the judge against their wishes. Read the Delhi High Court death reference judgement on this aspect.
The main accused died in police custody in very suspicious circumstances. Two other accused were assaulted in police custody, and one of them was perhaps poisoned and was critical enough to be hospitalized.
The only confession is by the dead accused's brother Mukesh Singh who also gave evidence against the other 4 living accused.
Not one but multiple news reports over a period of weeks reported and quoted the police to say that the bus was found in a Noida school compound. Later the story changed and now the bus was stated to have been found in R K Puram with the dead accused Ram Singh conveniently sitting in it. The police refused/ failed to disclose exactly what led them to the bus in R K Puram. It was described as "secret information".
Why did the boyfriend not have serious injuries if he was beaten with iron rods?
The boyfriend claimed in a video interview (available on Youtube) to a French news outlet that he stood by the road waving for help and that he lifted the victim into the police jeep. But he later claimed he sustained leg fracture/s. His medical examination did not record any fracture. Yet later in interviews he had a cast. There is something here that needs to be explained.
The boyfriend is the only eyewitness.
The families etc would have been threatened.
The media was prevented from freely reporting/ covering the trial as it was declared to be in camera.
The DNA evidence links only one accused to the victims body. The other accused are linked by DNA evidence only to clothes recovered from the bus/ their homes/ etc.
All this evidence could have been planted.
If the accused thought the woman was dead, why did they let off her boyfriend (who could identify them) alive? They should have killed him too.
Four accused (except Mukesh Singh) have denied their involvement, so there are no confessions. But yet they are described as having led the police to evidence.
Why would the accused retain bank cards, phones, sim cards and clothes of the victims which would have led the police to them.
I read one report that a sim card of the victim was found in Noida by a third person who handed it over to the police.
The dental evidence is flimsy and not 100% reliable. It also connects to only one accused.
If one or more of these people were scapegoated, they were selected precisely because they were socially dispensable and did not have family/ support/ resources etc who could fight for them. One family in the film claims it was threatened with destruction.
If the police framed one or more of these men, then it also ensured that they were not able to defend themselves.
They could be guilty, but the above does raise concerns.
Just saying, that a public trial would have been better in this case.
www.asianage.com/interview-week/avanindra-wanted-money-give-his-interview-and-i-refused-point-blank-386
threads most popular
thread most upvoted
comment newest
first oldest
first