Lawyer in Nirbhaya case stuns Supreme Court with ‘bribe claim’ against parents as judges hear plea to revoke death sentence
- ‘Outrageous’ claims heard in hearing seeking review of the death penalty given
- Advocate ML Sharma, who represents Mukesh, accused the state and police of bribing the victim’s mother and father
- The comment provoked a sharp reaction from both judges and the parents
- On December 16, 2012, the victim and a companion were attacked by six men aboard a moving bus in South Delhi
- Mukesh, Pawan, Vinay and Akshay face the death penalty for the attack
- See more news from India at www.dailymail.co.uk/indiahome
Four days before the fifth anniversary of the brutal incident that triggered worldwide outrage, a defence lawyer for four death row convicts in the Nirbhaya gang-rape and murder case triggered controversy with bizarre comments in the Supreme Court.
During the hearing of the plea, seeking a review of the death penalty confirmed by the Supreme Court on May 5, advocate ML Sharma who represents Mukesh, accused the ‘state and police of bribing two witnesses (the victim’s mother and father) to tow the prosecution’s fabricated and manufactured story in the trial court implicating the accused’.
The shocking comment immediately provoked a sharp reaction from Chief Justice Dipak Misra who tersely told Sharma: ‘What is this? Stop it. You can’t make such statements… and that too at the review stage.’
Advocate ML Sharma, who represents Mukesh, accused the state and police of bribing the victim’s mother and father (pictured) but the claims were slammed in the court
In a note submitted to the judges and arguing orally Sharma termed the DDA flat in Dwarka given to victim’s parents and grant of compensation of Rs 20 lakh by the Chief Minister as ‘bribes to prosecution witness from state accounts’.
Talking to Mail Today, the victim’s father Badrinath Singh expressed shock at the ‘outrageous’ comments. ‘It is unimaginable how a lawyer can make such insensitive comments. He is trying to insult us,’ said Singh.
During the hearing Sharma was pulled up for reiterating whatever was argued earlier and not making a case for review by pointing out the errors in its earlier judgement confirming the death penalty.
The ‘outrageous’ claims were heard in a SC hearing seeking a review of the death penalty
CJI told Sharma: ‘What are you arguing? Please make a case for review. Tell us how our conclusion is wrong. Prove our analysis of DNA and dying declaration was wrong, investigation was perverse, etc. You are only repeating what you argued earlier.’
While upholding the death penalty given to Mukesh, Pawan, Vinay and Akshay by the trial court and Delhi High Court, the SC bench had termed the attitude of the offenders as ‘beastial proclivity’ and said ‘It sounds like a story from a different world where humanity is treated with irreverence.’
‘If ever a case called for hanging, this was it,’ the judges had said.
Nirbhaya’s mother in a ceremony to remember the victim, who died five years ago
‘The cruel manner in which the gang rape was committed in the moving bus; iron rods were inserted in the private parts of the victim; and the coldness with which both the victims were thrown naked in cold wintery night of December, shocks the collective conscience of the society.
‘The present case clearly comes within the category of “rarest of rare case” where the question of any other punishment is “unquestionably foreclosed”,’ they added.
On December 16, 2012, the victim and a companion were attacked by six men aboard a moving bus in South Delhi. The woman, who was brutalised with an iron rod and had her intestines pulled out, died in a Singapore hospital 13 days later.
One of the men, Ram Singh, was found hanging in his cell in Delhi’s Tihar Jail in March 2013, while a convicted juvenile was released in December 2015.