Latest news with #DelhiStateLegalServicesAuthority
Time of India
3 days ago
- Politics
- Time of India
Delhi High Court dismisses plea against demolition of Pakistani Hindu refugee camp
New Delhi: dismissed a petition seeking a direction to Delhi Development Authority not to disturb or demolish the Pakistani Hindu refugee camp at Majnu ka Tilla until an alternative piece of land is allotted to the residents. Tired of too many ads? go ad free now A single-judge bench of Justice Dharmesh Sharma observed that the Pakistani refugees could not be rehabilitated under the DUSIB policy due to their foreign nationality status. "Needless to state, the effect of the acceptance of such an application would be that the aggrieved refugees shall be deemed citizens of India and would be able to enjoy all rights and benefits available to any ordinary citizen of India," it said. The court rejected the plea filed by Ravi Ranjan Singh, stating that he and other similarly placed refugees have no right to continue occupying the area. It vacated the interim relief granted in March last year. Singh also requested that DDA be directed to make embankments along the Yamuna so that such colonies and religious structures might be protected, as was the case with the Akshardham temple and Commonwealth Games Village, and that the sanctity of the river might also be maintained. The court impressed upon the petitioner and the other refugees to first acquire Indian citizenship under Section 10A of . It added that the aggrieved parties could approach the member secretary, Delhi State Legal Services Authority, for help. The court observed that even Indian citizens couldn't claim alternate allotment as an absolute right, particularly in cases concerning specially prohibited areas like zone O of Delhi, i.e., Tired of too many ads? go ad free now the Yamuna floodplain. The bench noted the camp was situated on the Yamuna floodplain and National Green Tribunal had directed to several govt agencies to repossess such areas and take steps to restore the river's ecological health. The court further added that its efforts to engage with the authorities to facilitate the refugees' rehabilitation didn't succeed due bureaucratic buck-passing, particularly on the part of Centre.
Time of India
27-05-2025
- Time of India
Court Sentences Two Men to Life Imprisonment in 2015 Murder Case
New Delhi: A Delhi court has sentenced two men to life imprisonment for a murder in 2015, calling the crime "heinous" and acknowledging the emotional trauma suffered by the victim's family. Tired of too many ads? go ad free now In an order dated May 13, additional sessions judge Virender Kumar Kharta stated that showing undue leniency in sentencing would undermine public confidence in the justice system. Citing a 2005 Supreme Court judgment, the court noted, "Undue sympathy to impose an inadequate sentence would do more harm to the justice system and erode public confidence in the efficacy of law. It is, therefore, the duty of every court to award a proper sentence. " The court was hearing the sentencing arguments in the case of and Sheesh Ram, who had earlier been convicted under Section 302 (murder) of IPC. "The family members of deceased, Manish, have suffered mental trauma, inconvenience, hardship, disappointment and frustration. Adequate compensation must be provided to them," the judge said, directing the matter to Delhi State Legal Services Authority (DLSA) to determine and award suitable compensation to the victim's legal heirs. Additional public prosecutor Pankaj Kumar Ranga argued for the death penalty, asserting that the two convicts, acting with common intent, had committed a brutal and deliberate murder. However, the court, while acknowledging the gravity of the crime and noting that aggravating factors outweighed mitigating ones, observed that the case did not meet the criteria for the "rarest of the rare" category required for capital punishment. It also took into account that both convicts were first-time offenders. "In sentencing, a balance must be maintained between the rights of the convict, the rights of the victim and the purpose of the law. Poverty alone is not a significant mitigating factor," the court said.
Hindustan Times
27-05-2025
- Hindustan Times
Delhi court sentences 2 men to life imprisonment in 2015 murder case
New Delhi, A court here has sentenced two men to life imprisonment in a 2015 murder case, saying that undue sympathy to impose an inadequate sentence would harm the justice system by undermining public confidence in the efficacy of law. Additional Sessions Judge Virender Kumar Kharta observed that although the aggravating circumstances outweighed the mitigating factors, the case was beyond the purview of the 'rarest of the rare' doctrine to award the death penalty. The court was hearing a case against Gurcharan Singh and Sheesh Ram, who had been earlier convicted under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code . Additional public prosecutor Pankaj Kumar Ranga argued that both the convicts in furtherance of their common intention committed heinous offence of murder of the victim, Manish, on April 1, 2015, and hence, they deserved maximum punishment. In an order dated May 13, the court cited a 2005 Supreme Court judgment, according to which, "Undue sympathy to impose an inadequate sentence would do more harm to the justice system to undermine the public confidence in the efficacy of law. It is therefore the duty of every court to award a proper sentence." The court said, "In the present case, the aggravating circumstances have outweighed the mitigating circumstances, but still the present case does not fall within the purview of the rarest of rare doctrine." It then sentenced the duo to life imprisonment under IPC Section 302. "This court is of the considered opinion that family members of deceased Manish have suffered mental trauma, inconvenience, hardship, disappointment and frustration, and adequate compensation needs to be granted to them," said the judge, referring the case to the Delhi State Legal Services Authority for determination and award of compensation to the legal heirs of the victim.
Time of India
26-05-2025
- Time of India
‘Poverty is not a shield': Life term to man for killing wife
New Delhi: A Delhi court, refusing to accept "poverty" as a major mitigating circumstance, sentenced a man to life imprisonment for murdering his wife in 2014 by setting her ablaze. The court observed that the aggravating circumstances in the case outweighed the mitigating circumstances. The court of additional sessions judge Virender Kumar Kharta, in an order dated May 17, stated that in the present case, the aggravating circumstances outweighed the mitigating circumstances. However, the case did not fall within the purview of the rarest of rare doctrine, which would warrant the death penalty. The court was hearing arguments on the quantum of sentence against Giriraj Kishor Bhardwaj, alias Shyam Naga, who was earlier convicted under Section 302 (murder) of the IPC. "While sentencing, the purpose of sentencing has to be borne in mind. The sentence imposed must establish a right balance between the rights of the convict and the rights of the victim and the purpose of law. Poverty is not a major mitigating circumstance," the judge said. Additional public prosecutor Pankaj Kumar Ranga sought the death penalty for the convict, stating he committed the heinous offence of murdering his wife, Kusum, by pouring a flammable liquid and setting her ablaze with a matchstick on Sept 24, 2014. The prosecutor mentioned that after the murder, one of the sons of the accused discontinued his studies and became a drug addict, while the other, a minor, started working as a helper for a vegetable vendor. The court then sentenced Bhardwaj to life imprisonment. "The convict is a first-time offender. The offence committed by the convict is heinous in nature. The deceased was the wife of the convict. The trauma of the family members of the deceased, Kusum, and her sons can be understood," the judge observed. The court also referred the case to the Delhi State Legal Services Authority (DSLA) to determine adequate compensation for the deceased's legal representatives, acknowledging that they suffered mental trauma, inconvenience, hardship, disappointment, and frustration. The counsel for the convict submitted before the court that the case does not fall under the rarest of rare doctrine and hence, he cannot be awarded the death penalty. She further argued that a lenient view may be taken against the convict, as he belongs to a poor strata of society.
NDTV
26-05-2025
- NDTV
Man Sentenced To Life For Murdering Wife In 2014
New Delhi: Around 11 years after a man murdered his wife by setting her ablaze, a court here has sentenced him to life imprisonment, saying the aggravating circumstances in the case outweighed the mitigating circumstances. Additional Sessions Judge Virender Kumar Kharta was hearing the arguments on the quantum of sentence against Giriraj Kishor Bhardwaj alias Shyam Naga, who was earlier convicted under Section 302 (murder) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). Additional public prosecutor Pankaj Kumar Ranga sought death imprisonment for the convict, saying he had committed the heinous offence of murdering his wife, Kusum, by setting her on fire after pouring some inflammatory liquid on her on September 24, 2014. The prosecutor said that after the murder, one of the convict's sons discontinued studies and became a drug addict, while the other son, a minor, started working as a helper for a vegetable vendor. In an order dated May 17, the court said, "In the present case, the aggravating circumstances have outweighed the mitigating circumstances, but still the present case does not fall within the purview of the rarest of rare doctrine (to award the death penalty)." The court then sentenced Bhardwaj to life imprisonment. It also referred the case to the Delhi State Legal Services Authority (DLSA) to determine adequate compensation for the deceased's legal representatives, saying they had suffered mental trauma, inconvenience, hardship, disappointment and frustration.
