Rohtak Rape Case: How It Was Nirbhaya Part 2 In All Possible Ways Or Even Worse - ED | The Youth Blog | ED | The Youth Blog Rohtak Rape Case: How It Was Nirbhaya Part 2 In All Possible Ways Or Even Worse - ED | The Youth Blog
  • Check out our new reading mode

    Rohtak Rape Case: How It Was Nirbhaya Part 2 In All Possible Ways Or Even Worse

    By

    December 23, 2015

    In February 2015 a Nepali women went missing in Rohtak. Few days later her dead body was found. The dead body was found with blades, condoms, stones and pieces of sticks stuffed in her private parts. The 28 year old Nepalese women was gang-raped by 9 men.

    NINE.

    This incident happened in Rohtak in Haryana which comes under the jurisdiction off Chandigarh High court.

    Now, let us look at the Nirbhaya rape case which initiated a mass movement across the sub-continent.

    Three years ago, 23 year old Jyoti Singh alias Nirbhaya was brutally gang-raped by 6 men. After the rape she was thrown out of the bus with her friend. She suffered great injuries, her intestine came out of her body and she finally died after struggling for a week.

    rape

    The Rohtak case can draw comparisons with Nirbhaya’s rape case as there was one minor/juvenile also involved. But the Rohtak rape case didn’t draw as much attention because here the victim died immediately, without any medical aid.

    Everybody talked about the level of brutality involved in the Nirbhaya case but, on some levels, this case was even more brutal.

    Fast-Track Judgement.

    A fast-track court in Haryana’s Rohtak gave death sentence to seven convicted men for raping and killing the 28-year-old Nepali women. Out of 9 men who raped her, 1 committed suicide and 1 is a 15-year-old JUVENILE. Which means that 2 people escaped from the hands of law.

    rohtak-1_650_021215102821

    The judge slapped a fine of Rs 1.40 lakhs on each of the convicts. The District and Sessions Judge Seema Singhal broke the nib of her pen after giving the death sentence to seven of the 9 accused.

    The Fast Track Court in the case of Nirbhaya awarded death sentence to the 4 adults as 1 was a juvenile and the other 1 committed suicide. Just like in the Rohtak case.

    Paradox.

    The day on which the juvenile accused of raping Nirbhaya was released is the same day on which the judgement upholding the rule of law in Rohtak rape case was given. A paradoxical event in Judiciary itself you could say.

    The fascinating point here is that in the case of Nirbhaya three years have passed and the juvenile involved in the case will walk free. Similarly, three years from now the juvenile accused in the Rohtak incident will be walking free as he has the defence of being a minor. Lucky him?

    Even the Supreme Court of India was helpless as it could not stay the release of the juvenile in Nirbhaya’s & Rohtak rape case because they had to work within the boundaries of the supposed laws made by our under-qualified politicians. The Juvenile Justice Bill passed in Rajya Sabha yesterday was not with retrospective effect, which meant, that it could not be used in both these cases.

    Some Big Questions Which Need Bigger Answers.

    Will the recently passed Juvenile Justice Bill, which treats 16-17 year olds as adults in heinous crimes, reduce such heinous crimes committed by them?

    Have we let down the Nirbhayas of this country by not punishing the main convict and letting them walk the earth freely?

    87854b6940d52d66a2597647d4508e2b

    When will death sentence, which is the last resort for the most cruel punishment, create a sense of fear in the minds of the rapists and people who can even have the urge to attempt such crimes?

    If the bill is not passed with retrospective effect, are we basically waiting for another Nirbhaya to happen in our country, when we get to use the bill?

    Aren’t these 2 Nirbhaya cases enough for us already? And hasn’t the bill primarily been passed because of them? So what’s the use, if these 2 cases can’t even apply the bill?

    News Source: Times Of India.

    Views presented in the article are those of the author and not of ED.

    Liked reading this article? Subscribe to us.
    In Social