CJI assures swift justice in Delhi gangrape case
Cautioning against vigilante justice in the wake of the death of the Delhi gang rape victim, Chief Justice of India Altamas Kabir promised that the judiciary would strongly be behind the common man. Upasana Mukherjee reports. Such crimes are not against body but soul: CJI | ‘Lawyers’ boycott can help accused’ | Family okay with naming victimindia Updated: Jan 03, 2013 01:05 IST
Cautioning against vigilante justice in the wake of the death of the Delhi gang rape victim, Chief Justice of India Altamas Kabir promised that the judiciary would strongly be behind the common man.
Justice Kabir, while inaugurating the first of the five fast-track courts on Wednesday to try rape cases in Delhi, justified the public anger in his first statement on the case. But he said, “Let’s not get carried away.”
On December 16, a 23-year-old woman was gang-raped and brutalised by six men on a moving bus in Delhi. Severely battered, the woman was admitted to Safdarjung Hospital and fought for her life for 10 days before being sent to Singapore where she died on December 30.
The Delhi Police are all set to file a charge sheet in the case in the Saket fast-track court on Thursday. The first fast-track court in the south Delhi court complex has 242 sexual assault cases — including 29 gang rape cases — to try.
The CJI said, “The people’s reaction has been that do not send the accused to trial. Hand them over to us and we will deal with them… Let us deal with the matter in a manner in which we are able to do justice as early as possible.”
He said he would try his best to ensure that the preparation of the case before it came before the court was taken care of as quickly as possible.
Pointing out that the incident could have been averted if the Supreme Court’s order on tinted glasses was implemented, the CJI, however, said, “The blame game will not serve anything. We have to go to the root of the problem.”
Asked about the setting up of fast-track courts in other parts of the country, Justice Kabir pointed out that such mechanism already existed, but some states had not yet set up such courts.