The two defence lawyers of the men convicted of the 2012 Delhi gang rape, ML Sharma and AP Singh, have acted as one of the lightning rods for the renewed public anger surrounding India’s banning of the BBC documentary film about the rape, featuring interviews with one of the death row convicts, his lawyers and others.
Bar Council of India (BCI) chairman Manan Kumar Mishra said, according to PTI:
Unless and until the council gets a complaint in writing, we cannot initiate any action. Until now, we have not received any complaint in this regard.
Once the complaint comes, we will examine that and only then we can do anything. Comments against women appear to be unwarranted, but we cannot do anything unless we get some complaint in this regard.
Senior advocate Raju Ramchandran responded that the BCI had “a duty to issue suo motu notice and ask for explanation”.
However, in 2013 the BCI under then-chairman Mishra had issued a show-cause notice to AP Singh for his statements after having reportedly received a complaint of professional misconduct under section 35 of the Advocates Act.
Mishra did not respond to an email from Legally India yesterday afternoon seeking comment on the progress of the 2013 show cause notice against Singh.
Advocate AP Singh, advocating ‘honour killing’ (in 2013 and now)
In a previous televised interview, Singh had said: “If my daughter or sister engaged in pre-marital activities and disgraced herself and allowed herself to lose face and character by doing such things, I would most certainly take this sort of sister or daughter to my farmhouse, and in front of my entire family, I would put petrol on her and set her alight.”
In the documentary, which is still available on YouTube and elsewhere despite the Indian government’s ban, Singh confirmed his position and said: “This is my stand. I still today stand on that reply.”
On an NDTV panel yesterday night, with both Sharma and Singh present, Mishra said: “I can only say that an inquiry will be held [against the two lawyers], and since I'm here before NDTV, I’ll not be part of that inquiry.
When asked whether he disagreed with AP Singh’s views, Mishra said: “Naturally, Mr Singh, he is talking of the character of the woman, the character of the girls.
“First of all, he's a lawyer. As a lawyer's point of view, first he’ll have to learn the character of lawyer, the professional ethics the lawyers is supposed to maintain. He'll have to learn what is the law of the land.”
ML Sharma, on botany
Sharma: “A female is just like a flower. It gives a good-looking, very softness pleasant performance. But on the other hand, a man is just like a thorn. Strong, tough enough.
“That flower always needs protection. If you put that flower in a gutter, it is spoilt. If you put that flower in a temple, it will be worshipped.”
ML Sharma, feminist in disguise? (via Jhuma Sen & @swarajpb)
“You are talking about man and woman as friends. Sorry, that doesn’t have any place in our society. We have the best culture. In our culture there is no place for a woman,” said Sharma, possibly having hit the nail on the head for why rape is so endemic.
“In our society, we never allow our girls to come out from the house after 6:30 or 7:30 or 8:30 in the evening with any unknown person.”
“She should not be on the street like food. Ladies are more precious than a gem. It is up to you how you want to keep it – in your hand or on the street.
“A woman means I immediately put the sex in his eyes.”
ML Sharma, psychology 101
On the 2012 gangrapists’ actions: “He will put his hand… Insert, hit! He would like to create a damage. It is just that kind of action. Beat him. Putting his hand forcefully inside.”
ML Sharma, on filmy influences
“They left our Indian culture,” said Sharma about the victims who had watched the Life of Pi in the cinema before getting attacked. “They were under the imagination of the filmy culture, in which they can do anything.”
This is not Sharma’s first brush with controversial and comments recorded on video – in 2013, he gave an interview to Newslaundry and shared some of his more bizarre views, including:
On rape accused: you cannot penetrate without being excited. If you can’t do that how can you go for sex, and how can you go for rape? So first step is excitement. And a man will be excited when he gets the “atmosphere”. And whether he gets an atmosphere or not depends on the circumstances in which he is. Will you be able to do it? Tell me. This has nothing to do with whether you are married or not. Go watch a “porn movie” today you’ll get to know.
On rape victims: Simple analogy. If you have a bread or sweetmeat and you put it outside your house can you tell me what will happen? Neighbourhood dogs will come eat it and go. Not a piece would be left for you. If you keep that box protected in the fridge the dogs won’t get a chance.
It is the responsibility of every woman to keep herself protected. If she puts herself in an unprotected situation she is to blame. Why don’t you guys tell people that your protection is in your own hands? Whether you are homeless or have a home your protection is in your own hands. You create circumstances for rape on your own and when something happens to you you become innocent. Mis-happenings happen because of you.
On rape in society: To end rape first thing will be to end the dirty atmosphere that has been created. Sexual atmosphere should be stopped. Any sexual pose should not be allowed because a sexual pose create a sexual affect in the mind of any person. With clothes or without clothes. [The media] puts sexual effects in the mind of innocent boys to make money, and provoke people, then say that we are doing nothing.
threads most popular
thread most upvoted
comment newest
first oldest
first
2. You seem to have very selectively chosen statistics and interpreted them very conveniently in your pathetic attempt to glorify these joker lawyers! Firstly, what do you mean by "false rape cases" of 78%? If all that means is that the accused were acquitted by the court, then that has been part of the problem, hasn't it? That historically, rape cases have been very difficult to prosecute on account of various obstructionist legal procedures and mindsets! It is funny that you seek to use THAT fact to glorify these morons' statements! I do not totally disagree that there are false rape cases filed, especially in urban areas. But just because false rape cases can and ARE filed by some unscrupulous women, can we say that all rape prosecutions should be lax? That is such a messed up argument! The solution for your "false cases" concern is not to make it difficult for women to file rape cases and to prosecute them easily, but to make sure that those who file false cases are dealt with strictly.....equally strictly and speedily as punishing rapists!
3. Thirdly, your "false rape cases" argument is actually completely irrelevant here!!! Even the great jerks that you are seeking to glorify here have not made the argument that THIS particular case was a "false case"........the victim is not even ALIVE to file a false case against anyone!!! So, just because there are x% of false cases filed by women (even assuming that to be a VERY high number), for these so-called defence lawyers to give an interview justifying the rapists's behaviour in THIS case is absolute rubbish.
4. Lastly, their comments are even more disturbing to me because they are spoken in the context of, and seeking to justify, a grotesquely violent crime....one that shook an entire country! Given how badly this girl was brutalised by these animals, it is equally savage for the lawyer to be making a statement like "I would have burned my daughter if she had done this"!!! What exactly has this victim done? It is this moron's clients who have done something "burn-worthy". And it is downright ridiculous that they (and people like YOU!) who actually need to be explained all this in such detail.
imgur.com/gallery/PKf7l
They talk about Indian culture and do not even understand what is the true place of women in the society. For reminders the ancient Hindu society always held women equal to men in all respects.
With changing times, the modern age, one must change in attitude and in multi culturalism.
These two are confused about culture that was brought on by 800 years of Mughal rule and there after 200 years of British rule in India where the society degenerated in its attitude. Now times have changed for the better.
I'm surprised they are not disbarred as yet.
They seems to be in false state of assumption , it's help them to win the case.
www.openthemagazine.com/article/arts-letters/no-more-goddesses-please-bring-in-the-sluts
Bloody moron, protect the woman from your stupidity, ignorance.
Protect the woman from your injustice, your [f]laws.
Protect the woman from your violence, hatred.
Protect the woman from your disgusting understanding of 'Indian Culture'.
Protect the woman from your absurd [im]moral ethics.
Women are not supposed to be protected from Men. We are bloody equals.
There is nothing objectionable in the documentary. Its quite moving and reform-oriented.
Someone should transcribe it in full for those who cannot watch it.
There is something strange about how one of the convicts Mukesh Singh speaks though in his interviews. He sounds and looks coached. I don't agree with those who have reported that he does not show remorse. Actually the man sounds scared. His elder brother was the one who died in police custody. Mukesh Singh claims he only drove the bus and did not rape.
www.facebook.com/pages/Rapists-Public-Execution/794063227316240
They don't represent the Indian society. I don't know why media even highlights the statements of these buffoons.
Mr Sharma did have some sensible points to make. The interviewer as a journalist had a duty to explore and expose the issues deeply. Mr Sharma obviously does not choose and use words with sophistication expected of a Supreme Court Lawyer. Instead Sekhri took a high moral ground and let his prejudices show thru.
That may have been excusable in the charged atmosphere in months following the rape.
The rapists have been hanged now. Nirbhaya's (Jyoti) parents have expressed their sense of 'closure".
The whole of India has been agitated about this case /event for last 8 years. We forced the Govt to enact very 'tough" anti-rape laws.
But the rapes continue with as much regularity and ferocity: admittedly are reported with alacrity.
It might be very useful to now take a telescopic view of the whole case, and the legal social and human issues surrounding.
There are lawyers who beat up other lawyers or accused criminals inside the courts premises.
There are also lawyers like these two bastards.
And the thing is they still practice law. Why doesn't the Bar Council cancel their license to practice as they are in clear violation of the Constitution of India and also criminals in the eyes of law.
Where is this country going? Why do we always 'adjust' and 'settle'?
threads most popular
thread most upvoted
comment newest
first oldest
first