New Delhi: The Delhi High Court on Tuesday sought the reply of two death row convicts in the 2009 Jigisha Ghosh murder case, whose case file has been sent by the trial court in New Delhi for confirmation of capital punishment.
A bench of justices Gita Mittal and PS Teji also sought personal presence of convicts Ravi Kapoor and Amit Shukla, who were handed down death penalty by the trial court.
The bench, which has fixed the matter for further hearing on November 24, also issued production warrants to the two. The sessions judge had sent the case record relating to the conviction and death sentence of Kapoor and Shukla to the high court.
It is mandatory for a trial court to refer a death penalty case to a high court for confirmation of the sentence within 30 days of the pronouncement of the verdict.
The trial court had on July 14 held the duo guilty for murder of 28-year-old IT executive Jigisha Ghosh and other counts. While sentencing the two to death on 22 August, the trial court had said the girl was killed in a "cold-blooded, inhuman and cruel manner" and "brutally mauled to death". It had said the magnitude and brutality exhibited by the convicts made the case 'rarest of rare', warranting capital punishment for Kapoor and Shukla. The third offender Baljeet Malik was given reprieve from the gallows for his good conduct in jail.
The three have challenged their conviction and order on sentence awarded by the trial court, on which the police were asked by the high court to file their response. Kapoor and Shukla in their appeal have said the trial court has "wrongly held that the case falls in the category of rarest of rare".
Malik, challenging his conviction and sentence of life term through his counsel Amit Kumar, has said the trial court judge has "failed to appreciate that there were contradictions and discrepancies in the depositions of prosecution witnesses (PWs) and, therefore conviction and the sentence awarded to him is liable to be set aside".
Shukla said the trial court has committed grave error by awarding death penalty to him, simply on the basis of biased jail/probation report about his client.
Published Date: Oct 25, 2016 07:06 pm | Updated Date: Oct 25, 2016 07:06 pm