Expressing displeasure over the manner in which the matter is being delayed since May 2017 on the pretext of filing appeals, review, curative and now mercy petitons before different courts and authorities at different stages by each of the convicts, the bench said, “It is a strategic plan on how to prolong the matter.”
The court was hearing a petition filed by three JNU professors seeking to preserve CCTV footage, WhatsApp conversations and other evidence related to the violence that unleashed on the campus of the premier institution injuring over 30 students and teachers.
On January 9, 2018, the woman filed a complaint before the JNU’s internal complaints committee (ICC), alleging sexual harassment by two professors. After an enquiry, on August 2, the ICC submitted its report and recommended that her request for re-registration be considered.
In his lawsuit, Singh, a former JNU student alleged that the book published by Patna-based Asian Development Research Institute (ADRI), through its Member Secretary Shaibal Gupta, and endorsed by Kumar, is a plagiarised version of his research work.
The order came on an appeal by the Delhi government against the trial court’s July 2011 verdict, by which the accused, Amar Pal, was acquitted of charges on the ground that the victim appeared to be a “tutored witness” and it was not safe to rely on her testimony.
A bench of Chief Justice D N Patel and Justice C Hari Shankar said: “...we deem it appropriate to clarify that we have not opined against the use of Urdu words per se. Every language is entitled to command its own respect, and we are conscious of the richness of Urdu as a language.”
The apex court’s verdict came on the mother’s appeal against the Delhi High Court’s March 2010 verdict, which convicted her and sentenced her to life imprisonment for murder. The High Court had upheld a trial court’s December 2009 judgment.