SC reserves verdict on Par attack convict's fresh plea

SC reserves verdict on Par attack convict's fresh plea The Supreme Court has reserved its verdict on a petition filed by Parliament attack convict Shaukat Hussain Guru challenging the 10-year jail term awarded to him by the apex court. Though the Court had earlier dismissed his review and curative petitions, the convict had chosen to file yet another writ petition claiming that his fundamental right had been violated by the Supreme Court. Shaukat claimed that the apex court had violated the principles of natural justice by convicting him under 123 IPC (concealing evidence)-an offence for which he was not charged. Appearing for the Delhi Government, Additional Solicitor General Gopal Subramaniam and counsel Mukta Gupta questioned the maintainability of the petition and asserted that Shaukat's conviction under Section 123 IPC (concealing information) relating to the attack was justified. Subramaniam submitted that Section 222 CrPC provided for convicting a person for a lesser offence, even though he might not have been held guilty of the main offence. In Shaukat's case he was charged for offences under IPC sections 121, 121A and 122 (offences relating to wage war against the country), but the apex court while quashing the charges convicted him under Section 123 IPC (concealing evidence). Earlier, a trial court had convicted and awarded death sentence to Shaukat for the 13th December 2001 attack on Parliament, which was upheld by the Delhi High Court. The apex court had, however, in 2005 altered Shaukat's death sentence to 10-years imprisonment under Section 123 IPC, while confirming the capital punishment imposed on the other convict Mohd Afzal. The convict's argument through senior counsel Shanti Bhushan was that since the charges under various other Sections including 121 (Conspiracy to wage war against the country), were quashed by the apex court, he could not be held guilty under Section 123 (concealing information) and sentenced to 10-years imprisonment. In other words, the convict's argument was that since he was never charged under Section 123, even the apex court did not have the power to convict him under a fresh charge. In 2005, the apex court upheld the death sentence awarded to co-convict and Jaish-e-Mohammad points man, Mohd Afzal, and reduced the sentence awarded to Shaukat Guru. The court had acquitted S A R Geelani, a Delhi University lecturer, by setting aside his conviction and death sentence by the trial court. The Supreme Court had also concurred with the High Court order quashing the five-years sentence awarded to the lone woman accused, Navjot Sandhu alias Afsan Guru, wife of Shaukat by the trial court for not disclosing the conspiracy to attack Parliament.

"Loved reading this piece by SANJAY DIXIT?
Join LAWyersClubIndia's network for daily News Updates, Judgment Summaries, Articles, Forum Threads, Online Law Courses, and MUCH MORE!!"

Join our Telegram group

Join our Whatsapp group