Pro­tect vic­tim’s kin, lawyer, says SC

The Hindu - - NEWS -

Ms. Jais­ing said the at­mos­phere was so “po­larised” that a fair trial would be im­pos­si­ble in Jammu. She clar­i­fied that the fam­ily only wanted the trial in Chandi­garh. The J&K Crime Branch team should con­tinue to in­ves­ti­gate the case. “In my ca­reer, I have never seen a State so sup­port­ive. The po­lice have done a good job. All the ac­cused have been foren­si­cally and phys­i­cally iden­ti­fied. This is the kind of in­ves­ti­ga­tion that they want to de­rail.”

State coun­sel Soy­aib Alam sub­mit­ted that the State had “no prob­lem” in pro­vid­ing se­cu­rity. “Five po­lice­men are al­ready with the fam­ily, who are mov­ing up the moun­tains. We will pro­vide ad­e­quate se­cu­rity to the fam­ily. We have no prob­lem with pro­vid­ing se­cu­rity for their lawyer as well,” Mr. Alam sub­mit­ted.

The court asked the J&K gov­ern­ment to con­sider the se­cu­rity of the ju­ve­nile ac­cused in the case, now lodged in a ju­ve­nile home.

“We have asked for this be­cause it was on his tes­ti­mony that the en­tire case turned,” Ms. Jais­ing sub­mit­ted.

Ob­struc­tion by lawyers

Last week, the Supreme Court had taken suo motu cog­ni­sance of al­leged ef­forts by lo­cal lawyers to ob­struct the fil­ing of the chargesheet in the case. The High Court Bar As­so­ci­a­tion at Jammu had even gone on a strike against fil­ing the chargesheet.

Chief Jus­tice Misra had said it was the duty of a lawyer to stand in sup­port of the lit­i­gant and not en­gage in ac­tiv­i­ties to ob­struct jus­tice. “Any ob­struc­tion af­fects the dis­pen­sa­tion of jus­tice,” Chief Jus­tice Misra said.

The Kathua crime has shocked the con­science of the na­tion ow­ing to the bru­tal na­ture of the crime on a child. The vic­tim had been miss­ing since Jan­uary 10. Her mu­ti­lated body was found on Jan­uary 17, bear­ing in­juries sug­gest­ing gang rape.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from India

© PressReader. All rights reserved.