Pages

Total Pageviews

Tuesday, June 30, 2015

Supreme Court of India(SCI) says rapist-victim mediation illegal; terms Madras HC order 'spectacular error' Wednesday July 01,2015

Directing Settlement in Rape Cases is 'Spectacular Error', Rules Supreme Court of India



Overturning Madras High Court's controversial directive allowing a rapist to mediate with the victim, the Supreme Court of India(SCI) on Wednesday July 01,2015 observed that a woman's body is her temple and there should be no mediation and no compromise in rape cases.

While hearing the case the SCI lashed out at the Madras High Court terming the judgement as a 'spectacular error'.

The SCI said any any approach of settlement in a rape case is against dignity of a woman.

The SCI's order comes a week after Madras High Court Justice P Devadass referred a case of a rapist, who was awarded seven years imprisonment by a trial court, to its mediation centre to settle the matter taking note of the future of the victim, now a mother of a child.

Madras High Court Justice P Devadass, holding that alternative dispute resolution such as mediation is now being used in criminal cases said, "In fact, even in Islam, Hinduism and Christianity there are instances of solving the disputes in a non-belligerent manner. The result of it is very good because there is no victor, no vanquished."
Granting interim bail to the accused Mohan, the judge in his order said he has already referred a similar matter in February for mediation which has yielded a good result and nearing happy resolution.
The judge referred the matter to the mediation centre attached to the High Court and said Rs 1 lakh should be deposited as fine by Mohan and it should be kept in Indian Bank, Thittakudi, Cuddalore District as a fixed deposit in the girl's name and granted interim bail enabling Mohan to attend the mediation.
The judge also directed the advocates appearing on both sides to assist the mediators in this case.
Justice Devdass' ruling had come under huge criticism with many legal eagles termed the order as "illegal" and "unwarranted".

No comments:

Post a Comment