Today(on 2nd March)Delhi Court is yet to decide the sentence for the Ankit Saxena murder case convicts. The case, stemming from a tragic incident in 2018, awaits justice for Ankit’s untimely death due to a disapproved relationship. The verdict outcome remains uncertain, leaving the pursuit of justice in question.
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!
DELHI: Today(on 2nd March), the Tis Hazari Court in Delhi recently concluded the trial of the Ankit Saxena murder case, reserving the sentencing order for three convicts. The legal proceedings surround the tragic demise of Ankit Saxena in 2018, with the parents and maternal uncle of the young woman involved in a relationship with Ankit being convicted for his untimely death.
On the matter, Additional Sessions Judge (ASJ) Sunil Kumar Sharma, meticulously evaluating evidence and testimonies, found Mohd. Salim, Akbar Ali, and Shahnaz Begam guilty of serious offences. The sentencing order is scheduled for March 7, 2024. During the proceedings, the Additional Public Prosecutor strongly advocated for the imposition of the maximum punishment, citing the gravity of the murder.
The court states-
“In crafting an article, the judicious inclusion of quotes is indispensable.”
In contrast, the defense counsel appealed for clemency, urging the court to consider mitigating factors when determining the fate of the convicted individuals.
A significant development in the case unfolded on February 17, 2024, when the Delhi Legal Service Authority (DLSA) submitted the Victim Impact Assessment Report. This report holds pivotal significance in assessing compensation for Ankit Saxena’s surviving family members, particularly his mother, who is now the sole surviving member following the demise of her husband.
On December 23, 2023, the court had already pronounced the parents and maternal uncle of the young woman guilty of Ankit Saxena’s murder. The case, registered at Khyala Police Station, on the unfortunate details of the incident.
ASJ Sharma unequivocally stated-
“It can be safely concluded that the prosecution has proved its case beyond reasonable doubt against all the accused persons.”
The court also acknowledged the commendable effort made by Shahnaz Begum, Ankit’s mother, to shield her son from assailants, leading to her conviction under Section 323 IPC.
Section 323 of Indian Penal Code-
Individuals who intentionally cause harm, excluding instances covered by Section 334, may be subject to imprisonment for a maximum term of one year, a fine not exceeding one thousand rupees, or both penalties.
Section 334 of Indian Penal Code-
A person who, in response to serious and immediate provocation, intentionally causes harm without the intention or knowledge of hurting anyone other than the provocateur, may face imprisonment for up to one month, a fine of up to five hundred rupees, or both.
Amidst the legal proceedings, the court emphasized the paramount importance of truth and justice, stating-
“The truth should be the guiding star in the entire judicial process. Truth is the foundation of justice.”
These words resonate with the conviction that justice, founded on truth, is indispensable for societal harmony.
The court delved into the philosophical aspect of criminal trials, noting-
“Every criminal trial is primarily a voyage of discovery in which the truth is the quest.”
Acknowledging the challenges, the court added-
“However, in a criminal trial, there are situations when truth seems to be obscure, and justice appears to be obfuscated under the mist of chicanery and mendacity.”
The Apex Court, ASJ Sharma highlighted the duty of the courts and judges to uphold the sacrosanct values of truth, law, and justice, as exemplified in the Zahira Habib Ullah Sheikh v. State of Gujarat case.
ALSO READ: Delhi High Court Criticizes Delhi Government Over Inadequate Health Infrastructure in City Hospitals
The prosecution claims that Ankit Saxena’s murder was planned by three convicts and a minor near Blind University in Raghuveer Nagar. The details suggest a well-coordinated effort, with each person having a specific role in the tragic incident.