A Delhi court on Friday, 31 January, postponed the hanging of the four convicts in the Nirbhaya gangrape and murder case till further notice, stating in its order that it "cannot turn a Nelson's eye" towards a convict.
The idiom, which dates its origins to the life of a 19th century British naval officer, is used to describe a situation where undesirable information is ignored.
Passing the order, Additional Sessions Judge Dharmender Rana said, “The Courts of this country cannot afford to adversely discriminate any convict, including death row convict, in pursuit of his legal remedies, by turning a Nelson’s eye towards him.”
The court did not agree with the Tihar jail authorities which had challenged the application of three convicts seeking a stay on their execution.
The black warrants for execution of the death sentence against Pawan Gupta, Vinay Kumar Sharma, Akshay Kumar and Mukesh Kumar Singh, were issued on 17 January.
The convicts' lawyer argued that rules in the Delhi Jail Manual dictate that when one convict's plea is pending the others cannot be hanged.
The court agreed to the argument and invoked Rule 836 of the Delhi Jail Manual Rules to state, “...if an appeal or an application is made by only one convict, the execution of sentence shall be postponed in the case of co-convicts also.”
Advocate AP Singh, representing the convicts – Pawan, Vinay and Akshay – urged the court to adjourn the executions "sine die" (with no appointed date for resumption). Vinay's mercy plea before the president is pending.
Mukesh’s mercy plea was dismissed by President Ram Nath Kovind on 17 January. The appeal against the rejection was dismissed by the Supreme Court on Wednesday.
The curative petitions of Vinay and Akshay have been rejected by the apex court. Pawan is the only one who has not filed a curative plea yet.
Convicts have the option of moving a mercy petition before the president only after the apex court dismisses their curative plea.
‘Redressal of Grievance Essential for Civilised Society’
Amid uproar over the issue of convicts trying to delay the execution, the court also mentioned in its order that the redressal of grievance is essential for a “civilised society”
“Without commenting upon the dilatory tactics adopted by the convicts, suffice it would be to state that seeking redressal of one’s grievances through procedure established by law is the hallmark of any civilized society,” the order read.
The order also made it clear that the judiciary is within its rights to stay the execution.
“… the duty to cause the sentence to be carried into effect inheres within it all the incidental powers including the powers to stay the execution of warrants,” the order said.
(At The Quint, we question everything. Play an active role in shaping our journalism by becoming a member today.)