The 2012 Delhi gang rape case involved a rape and fatal assault that occurred on 16 December 2012 in Munirka, a neighbourhood in South Delhi. The incident took place when a 23-year-old female physiotherapy intern, was beaten, gang raped, and tortured in a private bus in which she was travelling with her male friend. There were six others in the bus, including the driver, all of whom raped the woman and beat her friend. Eleven days after the assault she was transferred to a hospital in Singapore for emergency treatment but died two days later.[3][4] The incident generated widespread national and international coverage and was widely condemned, both in India and abroad. Subsequently, public protests against the state and central governments for failing to provide adequate security for women took place in New Delhi, where thousands of protesters clashed with security forces. Similar protests took place in major cities throughout the country. Since Indian law does not allow the press to publish a rape victim's name, the victim was widely known as Nirbhaya, meaning "fearless", and her struggle and death became a symbol of women's resistance to rape around the world.[5]
All the accused were arrested and charged with sexual assault and murder. One of the accused, Ram Singh, died in police custody from possible suicide on 11 March 2013 in the Tihar Jail.[6] According to some published reports, the police say Ram Singh hanged himself, but defense lawyers and his family allege he was murdered.[7] The rest of the accused went on trial in a fast-track court; the prosecution finished presenting its evidence on 8 July 2013.[8] The juvenile was convicted of rape and murder and given the maximum sentence of three years' imprisonment in a reform facility, as per the Juvenile justice Act 2000.[9] On 10 September 2013, the four remaining adult defendants were found guilty of rape and murder and three days later were sentenced to death by hanging.[10][11][12] In the death reference case and hearing appeals on 13 March 2014, Delhi High Court upheld the guilty verdict and the death sentences.[13] On 18 December 2019, the Supreme Court of India rejected the final appeals of the condemned perpetrators of the attack.[14] On 7 January 2020, a judge in New Delhi issued death warrants for all four men, scheduling their executions for 7:00 am on 3 March 2020.[15] The authorities alleged that the four adult convicts were "intentionally delaying" and "frustrating" the legal process in this case by filing their pleas in stages, so that their execution could be postponed. On 17 January 2020, after the convicts exhausted their mercy pleas, a Delhi court issued a second death warrant for the convicts to be hanged on 1 February 2020 at 6 am.
As a result of the protests, in December 2012, a judicial committee was set up to study and take public suggestions for the best ways to amend laws to provide quicker investigation and prosecution of sex offenders. After considering about 80,000 suggestions, the committee submitted a report which indicated that failures on the part of the government and police were the root cause behind crimes against women. In 2013, the Criminal Law (Amendment) Ordinance, 2013 was promulgated by President Pranab Mukherjee, several new laws were passed, and six new fast-track courts were created to hear rape cases. Critics argue that the legal system remains slow to hear and prosecute rape cases, but most agree that the case has resulted in a tremendous increase in the public discussion of crimes against women and statistics show that there has been an increase in the number of women willing to file a crime report. However, in December 2014, the second anniversary of the attack, the victim's father called the promises of reform unmet and said that he felt regret in that he had not been able to bring justice for his daughter and other women like her.[16]
A BBC documentary titled India's Daughter based on the attack was broadcast in the UK on 4 March 2015.[17] Indian-Canadian filmmaker Deepa Mehta's 2016 film Anatomy of Violence was also based on the incident, exploring the social conditions and values in Indian society that made it possible.[18] In 2019, Netflix original TV series Delhi Crime is based on the Delhi Police's search for the culprits of this case.[19]
Incident
The victims, a 23-year-old woman, Jyoti Singh, and her male friend, were returning home on the night of 16 December 2012 after watching the film Life of Pi in Saket, South Delhi.[20] They boarded the bus at Munirka for Dwarka at about 9:30 pm (IST). There were only six others on the bus, including the driver. One of the men, identified as minor, had called for passengers telling them that the bus was going towards their destination.[3][21] Her friend became suspicious when the bus deviated from its normal route and its doors were shut. When he objected, the group of six men already on board, including the driver, taunted the couple, asking what they were doing alone at such a late hour.[22]
During the argument, a scuffle ensued between her friend and the group of men. He was beaten, gagged and knocked unconscious with an iron rod. The men then dragged Jyoti to the rear of the bus, beating her with the rod and raping her while the bus driver continued to drive. A medical report later said that she suffered serious injuries to her abdomen, intestines and genitals due to the assault, and doctors said that the damage indicated that a blunt object (suspected to be the iron rod) may have been used for penetration.[20] That rod was later described by police as being a rusted, L-shaped implement of the type used as a wheel jack handle.[23][24][25]
According to police reports Jyoti attempted to fight off her assailants, biting three of the attackers and leaving bite marks on the accused men.[26] After the beatings and rape ended, the attackers threw both victims from the moving bus. One of the perpetrators later cleaned the vehicle to remove evidence. Police impounded it the next day.[26][27]
The partially clothed victims were found on the road by a passerby at around 11 pm. The passerby called the Delhi Police who took the couple to Safdarjung Hospital, where Jyoti was given emergency treatment and placed on mechanical ventilation.[28] She was found with injury marks, including numerous bite marks, all over her body. According to reports, one of the accused men admitted to having seen a rope-like object, assumed to be her intestines, being pulled out of the woman by the other assailants on the bus. Two blood-stained metal rods were retrieved from the bus and medical staff confirmed that "it was penetration by this that caused massive damage to her genitals, uterus and intestines".[24][25]
Victims
Jyoti Singh was born and raised in Delhi, while her parents were from a small village in the Ballia district of Uttar Pradesh. Her father sold his ancestral land to educate her, and worked double shifts to continue to pay for her schooling. In an interview he related that as a youth he had dreamed of becoming a school teacher, but at that time education was not considered important and girls were not even sent to school. "Attitudes are changing back home now, but when I left 30 years ago, I vowed to never deny my children of education, so sending them to school was fulfilling my desire for knowledge."[29][30][failed verification] He said that he put his daughter's education above that of even his two sons, stating: "It never entered our hearts to ever discriminate. How could I be happy if my son is happy and my daughter isn't? And it was impossible to refuse a little girl who loved going to school."[29][30]
In compliance with Indian law, the real name of the victim was initially not released to the media, so pseudonyms were used for her by various media houses instead, including Jagruti ("awareness"), Jyoti ("flame"), Amanat ("treasure"), Nirbhaya ("fearless one"), Damini ("lightning", after the 1993 Hindi film) and Delhi braveheart.[31][32][33][34][35]
The male victim was a software engineer from Gorakhpur, Uttar Pradesh, who lives in Ber Sarai, New Delhi; he suffered broken limbs but survived.[36][37]
Delhi police registered a criminal case against the editor of a Delhi-based tabloid, Mail Today, for disclosing the female victim's identity, as such disclosure is an offence under section 228(A) of Indian Penal Code.[38] Shashi Tharoor, then a union minister, suggested that if the parents had no objection, her identity could be made public, with a view to showing respect for her courageous response by naming future laws after her.[39] Speaking to a British press reporter on 5 January, the victim's father was quoted as saying, "We want the world to know her real name. My daughter didn't do anything wrong, she died while protecting herself. I am proud of her. Revealing her name will give courage to other women who have survived these attacks. They will find strength from my daughter."[40] Indian law forbids revealing the name of a rape victim unless the family agrees to it and, following the news article which published the father's reported quote and the victim's name, some news outlets in India, Germany, Australia, and the United States also revealed her name.[41] However, the following day Zee News quoted the father as saying, "I have only said we won't have any objection if the government uses my daughter's name for a new law for crime against women that is more stringent and better framed than the existing one."[42] During a protest against the juvenile convict's release on 16 December 2015, the victim's mother said that the victim's name was Jyoti Singh and she was not ashamed of disclosing her name.[43]
Medical treatment and death
On 19 December 2012, Singh underwent her fifth surgery which removed most of her remaining intestine. Doctors reported that she was in "stable but critical" condition.[44] On 21 December, the government appointed a committee of doctors to ensure she received the best medical care.[45] By 25 December, she remained intubated, on life support and in critical condition. Doctors stated that she had a fever of 102 to 103 °F (39 °C) and that internal bleeding due to sepsis was somewhat controlled. It was reported that she was "stable, conscious and meaningfully communicative".[46]
At a cabinet meeting chaired by Manmohan Singh on 26 December, the decision was taken to fly her to Mount Elizabeth Hospital in Singapore for further care. Mount Elizabeth is a multi-organ transplant speciality hospital.[47][48] Some doctors criticised the decision as political, questioning the need to transfer an intensive care unit (ICU) patient for organ transplants that were not scheduled for weeks or even months later.[49][50] Government sources indicate that the Chief Minister of Delhi, Sheila Dikshit, was personally behind the decision.[51] Hours earlier, Union Minister P. Chidambaram had stated that Jyoti was not in a condition to be moved.[52] An anonymous source quoted by The Sunday Guardian stated that the decision to move her was taken "when it was already clear that she would not survive the next 48 hours".[53]
During the six-hour flight by air-ambulance to Singapore on 27 December, Jyoti suddenly went into a "near collapse", which a later report described as a cardiac arrest.[54] The doctors on the flight created an arterial line to stabilise her, but she had been without pulse and blood pressure for nearly three minutes and never regained consciousness in Singapore.[55]
On 28 December, at 11 am (IST), her condition was extremely critical. The chief executive officer of the Mount Elizabeth Hospital said that the victim suffered brain damage, pneumonia, and abdominal infection, and that she was "fighting for her life."[54] Her condition continued to deteriorate, and she died at 4:45 am on 29 December, Singapore Standard Time (2:15 am, 29 December, IST; 8:45 pm, 28 December, UTC).[56] Her body was cremated on 30 December in Delhi under high police security. The Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), the country's main opposition party at that time criticised the high security levels, stating that they were reminiscent of the Emergency Era, during which civil liberties were suspended.[57]
Arrests
Police had found and arrested some suspects within 24 hours of the crime.[58] From recordings made by a highway CCTV vehicle, a description of the bus, a white charter bus with a name written on it, was broadcast. Other operators identified it as being contracted by a South Delhi private school. They then traced it and found its driver, Ram Singh. Police obtained sketches of the assailants with the help of the male victim, and used a mobile phone stolen from the two victims to find one of the assailants.[58]
Six men were arrested in connection with the incident. They included Ram Singh, the bus driver, and his brother, Mukesh Singh, who were both arrested in Rajasthan. Ram and Mukesh Singh lived in Ravidas camp, a slum in South Delhi.[59] Vinay Sharma, an assistant gym instructor, and Pawan Gupta, a fruit seller, were both arrested in UP and Bihar.[60] A seventeen-year-old juvenile from Badayun, Uttar Pradesh,[61][62][63] was arrested at the Anand Vihar terminal in Delhi. The juvenile had only met the others that day.[63] Akshay Thakur, who had come to Delhi seeking employment, was arrested in Aurangabad.[60][64]
According to reports, the group had been eating and drinking together and "having a party" earlier in the day.[3] Although the charter bus which Ram Singh drove on weekdays was not permitted to pick up public passengers[27] or even to operate in Delhi because of its tinted windows,[65] they decided to take it out "to have some fun".[3] A few hours before committing the gang rape, the attackers had robbed a carpenter. The carpenter was 35-years old Ram Adhar who boarded the bus which was being driven by Mukesh Singh. The juvenile convict had lured him into the bus saying it was going to Nehru Place. He was then beaten up and robbed of his mobile phone and ₹1500 in cash. After robbing him, the group dumped him at the IIT Flyover. Ram reported about the group in the bus robbing him to three police constables Kailash, Ashok and Sandeep who were passing nearby. They refused to take any action in response, saying that the crime scene wasn't under their purview as they were from the Hauz Khas police station, and that he would have to report the incident to the station in Vasant Vihar.[22][66][67][68]
Shortly after the attacks, Pawan Gupta said he accepted his guilt and should be hanged.[69][70] Mukesh Singh, who was placed in Tihar Jail after his arrest, was assaulted by other inmates and was kept in solitary confinement for his own protection.[71]
Ram Singh was presented before the Metropolitan Magistrate on 18 December 2012.[72] He refused to participate in an identification process.[65] Investigation revealed a history of frequent drinking that resulted in "blinding rage", "bad temper", and quarrels with employers, that had led friends to call him "mental".[73] On 11 March, Ram Singh was discovered hanging from a ventilator shaft in his cell which he shared with 3 other prisoners, at about 5:45 am.[74] Authorities said it was unclear whether it was a suicide or a murder.[75][76][77]
Trial
The male victim testified in court on 19 December 2012.[78] Pandey recorded his statement with a sub-divisional magistrate at the Safdarjung Hospital on 21 December, in the presence of the Deputy Commissioner of police.[79]
On 21 December, the government promised to file the charge sheet quickly and seek the maximum penalty of life imprisonment for the perpetrators.[80] Following public outrage and a demand for a speedy trial and prosecution, on 24 December, the police promised to file the charge sheet within one week.[81] The Parliamentary Standing Committee on Home Affairs met on 27 December to discuss the issue, and Union Home Secretary R. K. Singh and Delhi Police Commissioner Neeraj Kumar were summoned to appear.[82] The Delhi High Court approved the creation of five fast-track courts to try rape and sexual assault cases.[83] The first of the five approved fast-track courts was inaugurated on 2 January 2013 by Altamas Kabir, Chief Justice of India, in Saket court complex in South Delhi.[84]
On 21 December, the Delhi High Court reprimanded the Delhi police for being "evasive" in a probe status report providing details of officers on patrol duty in the area covered by the bus route.[85] A further court hearing on the matter was scheduled for 9 January 2013.[85] The following day, the Delhi Police initiated action against three Hauz Khas police station personnel for their inaction in responding to the robbery of the carpenter that took place earlier on the bus in the day.[22] On 24 December, two Assistant Commissioners of Police were suspended for failing to prevent the gang rape incident.[86]
Juvenile defendant
The juvenile defendant was declared as 17 years and six months old on the day of the crime by the Juvenile Justice Board (JJB), which relied on his birth certificate and school documents. The JJB rejected a police request for a bone ossification (age determination) test for a positive documentation of his age.[87][88][89]
On 28 January 2013, the JJB determined that he would not be tried as an adult. A petition moved by Janata Party president Subramanian Swamy seeking the prosecution of the minor as an adult because of the violent nature of his alleged crime was rejected by the JJB.[90][91][92] The minor was tried separately in a juvenile court.
A verdict in the case was scheduled to be announced on 25 July,[93] but was deferred until 5 August[94] and then deferred again to 19 August.[95] On 31 August, he was convicted of rape and murder under the Juvenile Justice Act and given the maximum sentence of three years' imprisonment in a reform facility, inclusive of the eight months he spent in remand during the trial.[96] The juvenile was released on 20 December 2015.[97]
For the rehabilitation and mainstreaming of the juvenile as mandated by the Juvenile Justice Act, 2000 management committees are set up before the release of juvenile convicts. Accordingly a 'post release plan' was submitted to the Delhi high court in December 2015. The plan, was prepared and submitted by the management committee, headed by the officer of the District Child Protection Unit, and had recommended that "the juvenile should lead a new life with a new identity provided by the appropriate government as applicable in his case if permissible to avoid any backlash or violent reaction".[98] According to the report, the juvenile had learnt cooking and tailoring while staying in the reform house.[98] Report further said that the juvenile would need a tailoring shop, a sewing machine and other tailoring equipments. The report also mentioned that a one time grant of ₹10,000 (US$140) from the government should be sufficient to support him initially.[98][99] The department of women and child development (WCD) of the government, stated that it will provide the money and will arrange the machine from an NGO.[100] The juvenile's family had ostracized him for the crime and refused to accept him.[101] However, after his release it was reported that he was working as a cook.[102]
Adult defendants
Five days after Jyoti's death, on 3 January 2013, the police filed charges against the five adult men for rape, murder, kidnapping,[103][104] destruction of evidence, and the attempted murder of the woman's male companion.[1] Senior lawyer Dayan Krishnan was appointed as the special public prosecutor.[105] Mukesh Singh, Vinay Sharma, Akshay Thakur and Pawan Gupta denied the charges. Some of the men had confessed earlier, however their lawyers said that their clients had been tortured and that their confessions had been coerced.[106][107]
On 10 January, one of their lawyers, Manohar Lal Sharma, said in a media interview that the victims were responsible for the assault because they should not have been using public transportation and, as an unmarried couple, they should not have been on the streets at night. He went on to say: "Until today I have not seen a single incident or example of rape with a respected lady. Even an underworld don would not like to touch a girl with respect."[108] He also called the male victim "wholly responsible" for the incident because he "failed in his duty to protect the woman".[108]
The Delhi police filed a charge sheet against the defendants on 13 March in the robbery of Ram Adhar.[109]
The four surviving adult defendants went on trial in a fast-track court. The prosecution presented evidence including witness statements, the victim's statement, fingerprints, DNA testing, and dental modelling. It completed its case on 8 July.[8][110]
Conviction and sentencing
On 10 September 2013, in the fast track court of Delhi, the four adult defendants were found guilty of rape, murder, unnatural offences and destruction of evidence.[111] All four men faced the death penalty, and demonstrators outside the courthouse called for the hanging of the defendants.[106][112] The victim's father also called for the defendants to be hanged, stating, "We will get complete closure only if all the accused are wiped off from the face of the earth."[110] Lawyers for three of the four stated that their clients intended to appeal the verdict.[106] The four men were sentenced on 13 September to death by hanging.[11][113] Judge Yogesh Khanna rejected pleas for a lesser sentence saying the case has "shocked the collective conscience of India" and that "courts cannot turn a blind eye to such crimes."[10][12] The victim's family was present for the sentencing and her mother expressed satisfaction over the verdict saying, "We were waiting with bated breath, now we are relieved. I thank the people of my country and the media."[114] After the verdict was delivered, the people waiting outside the courtroom applauded.[114]
On 13 March 2014, the Delhi High Court found each of the defendants guilty of rape, murder, unnatural offences and destruction of evidence. With the verdict; the High Court confirmed death sentence for all four men convicted in September 2013. The court noted that the crime, which stirred widespread protests over sexual crimes against women in the country, fell into the judicial system's "rarest of rare category" that allows capital punishment.[115] The lawyers of the four men said they would appeal to the Supreme Court.[13]
Supreme Court appeal
On 15 March 2014, the Supreme Court of India stayed the execution of two of the four convicts, Mukesh Singh and Pawan Gupta, to allow them to make their appeal against their conviction on 31 March.[116] This was further extended by the court to the second week of July.[117] On 2 June, the two other convicts, Sharma and Thakur, also asked the Supreme Court to stay their execution to allow them to make an appeal of their convictions.[118][119] On 14 July, their execution was also stayed by Supreme Court.[120] On 27 August 2015, Vinay, Akshay, Mukesh and Pawan were convicted of robbing Ram Adhar and were later sentenced to 10-years imprisonment.[66][109]
On 5 May 2017, the Supreme Court rejected the convicts' appeal and saying they had committed "a barbaric crime" that had "shaken society's conscience," the court upheld the death sentence of the four who had been charged in the murder. The verdict was well received by the family of the victim and the civil society. According to legal experts, the convicts still had the right to file a review petition to the Supreme Court.[121] On 9 July 2018, the Supreme Court rejected a review petition by three of the convicts.[122][123]
In November 2019, the Supreme Court dismissed a review petition from Akshay pleading for mercy. In doing so, the court retained the death sentence. After the verdict, Akshay's lawyer told the Supreme Court that he would appeal to the President. For this, he should be given three weeks time.[124][125] In January 2019, a five-judge bench of the Supreme Court rejected the curative petitions of convicts, Vinay Sharma and Mukesh.[125]
On 7 January 2020 a death warrant was issued for the Nirbhaya rapists by a Delhi court, setting an execution date of 22 January 2020 at 7am IST in Tihar Jail.[126][127][128]
Government authorities and the victim's mother alleged that the four convicts were "intentionally delaying" and "frustrating" the legal process in this case by filing their please in stages, so that the execution could be postponed.[129] Under the prison rules, if a case has more than one convicts awaiting death penalty and one of them moves a mercy plea then the execution of all the convicts would be need to be postponed till a decision is made on the pending mercy plea.[129]
Mercy plea to the President of India
Convict Mukesh filed a mercy plea. The Delhi government made a recommendation to reject the plea and forwarded it to the Lieutenant Governor. Deputy Chief Minister of Delhi, Manish Sisodia stated that this action was taken at "lightning speed."[129]
On 17 January 2020, the president of India rejected the mercy plea of the convict Mukesh Singh. The home ministry had recommended the president that the plea should be rejected.[130]
Second and third death warrants
On 17 January 2020, hours after the rejection of the mercy plea, a Delhi court issued a second death warrant for the convicts to be hanged after a mandatory fourteen days gap on 1 February at 6 am.[131] The fourteen days reprieve was provided in accordance with law which states that the convicts awaiting an execution must have a reprieve after their mercy plea is rejected.[131] During the same hearing, the court also rejected a plea by the convict Mukesh to postpone the execution.[131]
On 17 January, convict Pawan appealed to the Supreme Court against the Delhi High Court order that rejected his claim that Pawan was a juvenile during the crime in 2012.[125] On 31 January, a Delhi court stayed the death warrant. The judge did not issue a fresh warrant for their execution. The lawyer cited Rule 836 of the prison manual which says that in a case where more than one person has been sentenced to death, the execution cannot take place unless all the convicts have exhausted their legal options.[132]
On 17 February 2020, a third death warrant was issued by the court with the execution date as 3 March 2020 at 6 am.[133] On 4 March 2020, a fourth death warrant was issued by court with the execution date as 20 March 2020 at 5.30 am.
Public protests
After the incident
Public protests took place in New Delhi on 21 December 2012 at India Gate and Raisina Hill, the latter being the location of both the Parliament of India and Rashtrapati Bhavan, the official residence of the President of India. Thousands of protesters clashed with police and battled Rapid Action Force units.[134] Demonstrators were baton charged,[135] shot with water cannon and tear gas shells, and arrested.[136]
Similar protests occurred throughout the country. More than 600 women belonging to various organisations demonstrated in Bangalore.[137][138] Thousands of people silently marched in Kolkata.[139] Protests occurred online as well on the social networking sites Facebook and WhatsApp, with users replacing their profile images with a black dot symbol.[140] Tens of thousands signed an online petition protesting the incident.[141]
Yoga guru Baba Ramdev and former Army chief General Vijay Kumar Singh were among the demonstrators who clashed with Delhi Police at Jantar Mantar.[142] On 24 December, activist Rajesh Gangwar started a hunger strike, saying about the accused men, "If my death shakes the system and gets them hanged, I am ready to die".[143] Gangwar ended his fast after 14 days, saying, "My fight to demand a strict law against rape will be continued in the future... I have dedicated myself for this cause".[144] Middle Finger Protests, a Chandigarh-based pressure group and NGO headed by human rights and social activist Prabhloch Singh, also played a key role in the agitations and protests in New Delhi
Seven metro rail stations in New Delhi were closed on 22 December to discourage protesters from gathering at Raisina Hill.[148] On 24 December, police blocked roads leading to India Gate and Raisina Hill to prevent possible mass protests, and closed nine metro stations, affecting thousands of transit patrons. News reporters were not allowed to reach India Gate and Raisina Hill. In addition to CrPC section 144, which disallows assembly of groups larger than five, curfew was imposed near the presidential residence.[149] The Hindustan Times accused police of using excessive force against the protestors, reporting that 375 tear gas canisters were used at India Gate and elsewhere in Delhi to disperse the crowds.[150] An article in First Post criticised the Indian government as well, saying that they failed to act positively or give credible assurances to the protesters and instead used police force, lathi-charging, pushing the media out of the scene, and shutting down metro rail stations.[151]
Police stated that peaceful protests had been "hijacked" by hooligans and political activists.[152]
During one protest, a police constable named Subhash Tomar collapsed and later died in hospital.[153] Two witnesses claimed that Tomar collapsed without being hit by any protesters, while a third disputed this.[154] Hospital doctors and the post-mortem gave contradictory reports: he died due to cardiac arrest, but it is not known if the heart attack was caused by blunt-force injuries that he suffered to his chest and neck.[155] Some experts state that his chest injuries may have been a side effect of the administration of CPR.[156][157] The Delhi Police arrested 8 young men and charged them with Tomar's murder and rioting at India Gate. Later in March 2013, the police admitted in the High Court they had no evidence against the eight and gave them a clean chit.[158] The youths said the move by the commissioner of police to charge them with murder had been "irresponsible".[159]
After the victim's death
All the accused were arrested and charged with sexual assault and murder. One of the accused, Ram Singh, died in police custody from possible suicide on 11 March 2013 in the Tihar Jail.[6] According to some published reports, the police say Ram Singh hanged himself, but defense lawyers and his family allege he was murdered.[7] The rest of the accused went on trial in a fast-track court; the prosecution finished presenting its evidence on 8 July 2013.[8] The juvenile was convicted of rape and murder and given the maximum sentence of three years' imprisonment in a reform facility, as per the Juvenile justice Act 2000.[9] On 10 September 2013, the four remaining adult defendants were found guilty of rape and murder and three days later were sentenced to death by hanging.[10][11][12] In the death reference case and hearing appeals on 13 March 2014, Delhi High Court upheld the guilty verdict and the death sentences.[13] On 18 December 2019, the Supreme Court of India rejected the final appeals of the condemned perpetrators of the attack.[14] On 7 January 2020, a judge in New Delhi issued death warrants for all four men, scheduling their executions for 7:00 am on 3 March 2020.[15] The authorities alleged that the four adult convicts were "intentionally delaying" and "frustrating" the legal process in this case by filing their pleas in stages, so that their execution could be postponed. On 17 January 2020, after the convicts exhausted their mercy pleas, a Delhi court issued a second death warrant for the convicts to be hanged on 1 February 2020 at 6 am.
As a result of the protests, in December 2012, a judicial committee was set up to study and take public suggestions for the best ways to amend laws to provide quicker investigation and prosecution of sex offenders. After considering about 80,000 suggestions, the committee submitted a report which indicated that failures on the part of the government and police were the root cause behind crimes against women. In 2013, the Criminal Law (Amendment) Ordinance, 2013 was promulgated by President Pranab Mukherjee, several new laws were passed, and six new fast-track courts were created to hear rape cases. Critics argue that the legal system remains slow to hear and prosecute rape cases, but most agree that the case has resulted in a tremendous increase in the public discussion of crimes against women and statistics show that there has been an increase in the number of women willing to file a crime report. However, in December 2014, the second anniversary of the attack, the victim's father called the promises of reform unmet and said that he felt regret in that he had not been able to bring justice for his daughter and other women like her.[16]
A BBC documentary titled India's Daughter based on the attack was broadcast in the UK on 4 March 2015.[17] Indian-Canadian filmmaker Deepa Mehta's 2016 film Anatomy of Violence was also based on the incident, exploring the social conditions and values in Indian society that made it possible.[18] In 2019, Netflix original TV series Delhi Crime is based on the Delhi Police's search for the culprits of this case.[19]
Incident
The victims, a 23-year-old woman, Jyoti Singh, and her male friend, were returning home on the night of 16 December 2012 after watching the film Life of Pi in Saket, South Delhi.[20] They boarded the bus at Munirka for Dwarka at about 9:30 pm (IST). There were only six others on the bus, including the driver. One of the men, identified as minor, had called for passengers telling them that the bus was going towards their destination.[3][21] Her friend became suspicious when the bus deviated from its normal route and its doors were shut. When he objected, the group of six men already on board, including the driver, taunted the couple, asking what they were doing alone at such a late hour.[22]
During the argument, a scuffle ensued between her friend and the group of men. He was beaten, gagged and knocked unconscious with an iron rod. The men then dragged Jyoti to the rear of the bus, beating her with the rod and raping her while the bus driver continued to drive. A medical report later said that she suffered serious injuries to her abdomen, intestines and genitals due to the assault, and doctors said that the damage indicated that a blunt object (suspected to be the iron rod) may have been used for penetration.[20] That rod was later described by police as being a rusted, L-shaped implement of the type used as a wheel jack handle.[23][24][25]
According to police reports Jyoti attempted to fight off her assailants, biting three of the attackers and leaving bite marks on the accused men.[26] After the beatings and rape ended, the attackers threw both victims from the moving bus. One of the perpetrators later cleaned the vehicle to remove evidence. Police impounded it the next day.[26][27]
The partially clothed victims were found on the road by a passerby at around 11 pm. The passerby called the Delhi Police who took the couple to Safdarjung Hospital, where Jyoti was given emergency treatment and placed on mechanical ventilation.[28] She was found with injury marks, including numerous bite marks, all over her body. According to reports, one of the accused men admitted to having seen a rope-like object, assumed to be her intestines, being pulled out of the woman by the other assailants on the bus. Two blood-stained metal rods were retrieved from the bus and medical staff confirmed that "it was penetration by this that caused massive damage to her genitals, uterus and intestines".[24][25]
Victims
Jyoti Singh was born and raised in Delhi, while her parents were from a small village in the Ballia district of Uttar Pradesh. Her father sold his ancestral land to educate her, and worked double shifts to continue to pay for her schooling. In an interview he related that as a youth he had dreamed of becoming a school teacher, but at that time education was not considered important and girls were not even sent to school. "Attitudes are changing back home now, but when I left 30 years ago, I vowed to never deny my children of education, so sending them to school was fulfilling my desire for knowledge."[29][30][failed verification] He said that he put his daughter's education above that of even his two sons, stating: "It never entered our hearts to ever discriminate. How could I be happy if my son is happy and my daughter isn't? And it was impossible to refuse a little girl who loved going to school."[29][30]
In compliance with Indian law, the real name of the victim was initially not released to the media, so pseudonyms were used for her by various media houses instead, including Jagruti ("awareness"), Jyoti ("flame"), Amanat ("treasure"), Nirbhaya ("fearless one"), Damini ("lightning", after the 1993 Hindi film) and Delhi braveheart.[31][32][33][34][35]
The male victim was a software engineer from Gorakhpur, Uttar Pradesh, who lives in Ber Sarai, New Delhi; he suffered broken limbs but survived.[36][37]
Delhi police registered a criminal case against the editor of a Delhi-based tabloid, Mail Today, for disclosing the female victim's identity, as such disclosure is an offence under section 228(A) of Indian Penal Code.[38] Shashi Tharoor, then a union minister, suggested that if the parents had no objection, her identity could be made public, with a view to showing respect for her courageous response by naming future laws after her.[39] Speaking to a British press reporter on 5 January, the victim's father was quoted as saying, "We want the world to know her real name. My daughter didn't do anything wrong, she died while protecting herself. I am proud of her. Revealing her name will give courage to other women who have survived these attacks. They will find strength from my daughter."[40] Indian law forbids revealing the name of a rape victim unless the family agrees to it and, following the news article which published the father's reported quote and the victim's name, some news outlets in India, Germany, Australia, and the United States also revealed her name.[41] However, the following day Zee News quoted the father as saying, "I have only said we won't have any objection if the government uses my daughter's name for a new law for crime against women that is more stringent and better framed than the existing one."[42] During a protest against the juvenile convict's release on 16 December 2015, the victim's mother said that the victim's name was Jyoti Singh and she was not ashamed of disclosing her name.[43]
Medical treatment and death
On 19 December 2012, Singh underwent her fifth surgery which removed most of her remaining intestine. Doctors reported that she was in "stable but critical" condition.[44] On 21 December, the government appointed a committee of doctors to ensure she received the best medical care.[45] By 25 December, she remained intubated, on life support and in critical condition. Doctors stated that she had a fever of 102 to 103 °F (39 °C) and that internal bleeding due to sepsis was somewhat controlled. It was reported that she was "stable, conscious and meaningfully communicative".[46]
At a cabinet meeting chaired by Manmohan Singh on 26 December, the decision was taken to fly her to Mount Elizabeth Hospital in Singapore for further care. Mount Elizabeth is a multi-organ transplant speciality hospital.[47][48] Some doctors criticised the decision as political, questioning the need to transfer an intensive care unit (ICU) patient for organ transplants that were not scheduled for weeks or even months later.[49][50] Government sources indicate that the Chief Minister of Delhi, Sheila Dikshit, was personally behind the decision.[51] Hours earlier, Union Minister P. Chidambaram had stated that Jyoti was not in a condition to be moved.[52] An anonymous source quoted by The Sunday Guardian stated that the decision to move her was taken "when it was already clear that she would not survive the next 48 hours".[53]
During the six-hour flight by air-ambulance to Singapore on 27 December, Jyoti suddenly went into a "near collapse", which a later report described as a cardiac arrest.[54] The doctors on the flight created an arterial line to stabilise her, but she had been without pulse and blood pressure for nearly three minutes and never regained consciousness in Singapore.[55]
On 28 December, at 11 am (IST), her condition was extremely critical. The chief executive officer of the Mount Elizabeth Hospital said that the victim suffered brain damage, pneumonia, and abdominal infection, and that she was "fighting for her life."[54] Her condition continued to deteriorate, and she died at 4:45 am on 29 December, Singapore Standard Time (2:15 am, 29 December, IST; 8:45 pm, 28 December, UTC).[56] Her body was cremated on 30 December in Delhi under high police security. The Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), the country's main opposition party at that time criticised the high security levels, stating that they were reminiscent of the Emergency Era, during which civil liberties were suspended.[57]
Arrests
Police had found and arrested some suspects within 24 hours of the crime.[58] From recordings made by a highway CCTV vehicle, a description of the bus, a white charter bus with a name written on it, was broadcast. Other operators identified it as being contracted by a South Delhi private school. They then traced it and found its driver, Ram Singh. Police obtained sketches of the assailants with the help of the male victim, and used a mobile phone stolen from the two victims to find one of the assailants.[58]
Six men were arrested in connection with the incident. They included Ram Singh, the bus driver, and his brother, Mukesh Singh, who were both arrested in Rajasthan. Ram and Mukesh Singh lived in Ravidas camp, a slum in South Delhi.[59] Vinay Sharma, an assistant gym instructor, and Pawan Gupta, a fruit seller, were both arrested in UP and Bihar.[60] A seventeen-year-old juvenile from Badayun, Uttar Pradesh,[61][62][63] was arrested at the Anand Vihar terminal in Delhi. The juvenile had only met the others that day.[63] Akshay Thakur, who had come to Delhi seeking employment, was arrested in Aurangabad.[60][64]
According to reports, the group had been eating and drinking together and "having a party" earlier in the day.[3] Although the charter bus which Ram Singh drove on weekdays was not permitted to pick up public passengers[27] or even to operate in Delhi because of its tinted windows,[65] they decided to take it out "to have some fun".[3] A few hours before committing the gang rape, the attackers had robbed a carpenter. The carpenter was 35-years old Ram Adhar who boarded the bus which was being driven by Mukesh Singh. The juvenile convict had lured him into the bus saying it was going to Nehru Place. He was then beaten up and robbed of his mobile phone and ₹1500 in cash. After robbing him, the group dumped him at the IIT Flyover. Ram reported about the group in the bus robbing him to three police constables Kailash, Ashok and Sandeep who were passing nearby. They refused to take any action in response, saying that the crime scene wasn't under their purview as they were from the Hauz Khas police station, and that he would have to report the incident to the station in Vasant Vihar.[22][66][67][68]
Shortly after the attacks, Pawan Gupta said he accepted his guilt and should be hanged.[69][70] Mukesh Singh, who was placed in Tihar Jail after his arrest, was assaulted by other inmates and was kept in solitary confinement for his own protection.[71]
Ram Singh was presented before the Metropolitan Magistrate on 18 December 2012.[72] He refused to participate in an identification process.[65] Investigation revealed a history of frequent drinking that resulted in "blinding rage", "bad temper", and quarrels with employers, that had led friends to call him "mental".[73] On 11 March, Ram Singh was discovered hanging from a ventilator shaft in his cell which he shared with 3 other prisoners, at about 5:45 am.[74] Authorities said it was unclear whether it was a suicide or a murder.[75][76][77]
Trial
The male victim testified in court on 19 December 2012.[78] Pandey recorded his statement with a sub-divisional magistrate at the Safdarjung Hospital on 21 December, in the presence of the Deputy Commissioner of police.[79]
On 21 December, the government promised to file the charge sheet quickly and seek the maximum penalty of life imprisonment for the perpetrators.[80] Following public outrage and a demand for a speedy trial and prosecution, on 24 December, the police promised to file the charge sheet within one week.[81] The Parliamentary Standing Committee on Home Affairs met on 27 December to discuss the issue, and Union Home Secretary R. K. Singh and Delhi Police Commissioner Neeraj Kumar were summoned to appear.[82] The Delhi High Court approved the creation of five fast-track courts to try rape and sexual assault cases.[83] The first of the five approved fast-track courts was inaugurated on 2 January 2013 by Altamas Kabir, Chief Justice of India, in Saket court complex in South Delhi.[84]
On 21 December, the Delhi High Court reprimanded the Delhi police for being "evasive" in a probe status report providing details of officers on patrol duty in the area covered by the bus route.[85] A further court hearing on the matter was scheduled for 9 January 2013.[85] The following day, the Delhi Police initiated action against three Hauz Khas police station personnel for their inaction in responding to the robbery of the carpenter that took place earlier on the bus in the day.[22] On 24 December, two Assistant Commissioners of Police were suspended for failing to prevent the gang rape incident.[86]
Juvenile defendant
The juvenile defendant was declared as 17 years and six months old on the day of the crime by the Juvenile Justice Board (JJB), which relied on his birth certificate and school documents. The JJB rejected a police request for a bone ossification (age determination) test for a positive documentation of his age.[87][88][89]
On 28 January 2013, the JJB determined that he would not be tried as an adult. A petition moved by Janata Party president Subramanian Swamy seeking the prosecution of the minor as an adult because of the violent nature of his alleged crime was rejected by the JJB.[90][91][92] The minor was tried separately in a juvenile court.
A verdict in the case was scheduled to be announced on 25 July,[93] but was deferred until 5 August[94] and then deferred again to 19 August.[95] On 31 August, he was convicted of rape and murder under the Juvenile Justice Act and given the maximum sentence of three years' imprisonment in a reform facility, inclusive of the eight months he spent in remand during the trial.[96] The juvenile was released on 20 December 2015.[97]
For the rehabilitation and mainstreaming of the juvenile as mandated by the Juvenile Justice Act, 2000 management committees are set up before the release of juvenile convicts. Accordingly a 'post release plan' was submitted to the Delhi high court in December 2015. The plan, was prepared and submitted by the management committee, headed by the officer of the District Child Protection Unit, and had recommended that "the juvenile should lead a new life with a new identity provided by the appropriate government as applicable in his case if permissible to avoid any backlash or violent reaction".[98] According to the report, the juvenile had learnt cooking and tailoring while staying in the reform house.[98] Report further said that the juvenile would need a tailoring shop, a sewing machine and other tailoring equipments. The report also mentioned that a one time grant of ₹10,000 (US$140) from the government should be sufficient to support him initially.[98][99] The department of women and child development (WCD) of the government, stated that it will provide the money and will arrange the machine from an NGO.[100] The juvenile's family had ostracized him for the crime and refused to accept him.[101] However, after his release it was reported that he was working as a cook.[102]
Adult defendants
Five days after Jyoti's death, on 3 January 2013, the police filed charges against the five adult men for rape, murder, kidnapping,[103][104] destruction of evidence, and the attempted murder of the woman's male companion.[1] Senior lawyer Dayan Krishnan was appointed as the special public prosecutor.[105] Mukesh Singh, Vinay Sharma, Akshay Thakur and Pawan Gupta denied the charges. Some of the men had confessed earlier, however their lawyers said that their clients had been tortured and that their confessions had been coerced.[106][107]
On 10 January, one of their lawyers, Manohar Lal Sharma, said in a media interview that the victims were responsible for the assault because they should not have been using public transportation and, as an unmarried couple, they should not have been on the streets at night. He went on to say: "Until today I have not seen a single incident or example of rape with a respected lady. Even an underworld don would not like to touch a girl with respect."[108] He also called the male victim "wholly responsible" for the incident because he "failed in his duty to protect the woman".[108]
The Delhi police filed a charge sheet against the defendants on 13 March in the robbery of Ram Adhar.[109]
The four surviving adult defendants went on trial in a fast-track court. The prosecution presented evidence including witness statements, the victim's statement, fingerprints, DNA testing, and dental modelling. It completed its case on 8 July.[8][110]
Conviction and sentencing
On 10 September 2013, in the fast track court of Delhi, the four adult defendants were found guilty of rape, murder, unnatural offences and destruction of evidence.[111] All four men faced the death penalty, and demonstrators outside the courthouse called for the hanging of the defendants.[106][112] The victim's father also called for the defendants to be hanged, stating, "We will get complete closure only if all the accused are wiped off from the face of the earth."[110] Lawyers for three of the four stated that their clients intended to appeal the verdict.[106] The four men were sentenced on 13 September to death by hanging.[11][113] Judge Yogesh Khanna rejected pleas for a lesser sentence saying the case has "shocked the collective conscience of India" and that "courts cannot turn a blind eye to such crimes."[10][12] The victim's family was present for the sentencing and her mother expressed satisfaction over the verdict saying, "We were waiting with bated breath, now we are relieved. I thank the people of my country and the media."[114] After the verdict was delivered, the people waiting outside the courtroom applauded.[114]
On 13 March 2014, the Delhi High Court found each of the defendants guilty of rape, murder, unnatural offences and destruction of evidence. With the verdict; the High Court confirmed death sentence for all four men convicted in September 2013. The court noted that the crime, which stirred widespread protests over sexual crimes against women in the country, fell into the judicial system's "rarest of rare category" that allows capital punishment.[115] The lawyers of the four men said they would appeal to the Supreme Court.[13]
Supreme Court appeal
On 15 March 2014, the Supreme Court of India stayed the execution of two of the four convicts, Mukesh Singh and Pawan Gupta, to allow them to make their appeal against their conviction on 31 March.[116] This was further extended by the court to the second week of July.[117] On 2 June, the two other convicts, Sharma and Thakur, also asked the Supreme Court to stay their execution to allow them to make an appeal of their convictions.[118][119] On 14 July, their execution was also stayed by Supreme Court.[120] On 27 August 2015, Vinay, Akshay, Mukesh and Pawan were convicted of robbing Ram Adhar and were later sentenced to 10-years imprisonment.[66][109]
On 5 May 2017, the Supreme Court rejected the convicts' appeal and saying they had committed "a barbaric crime" that had "shaken society's conscience," the court upheld the death sentence of the four who had been charged in the murder. The verdict was well received by the family of the victim and the civil society. According to legal experts, the convicts still had the right to file a review petition to the Supreme Court.[121] On 9 July 2018, the Supreme Court rejected a review petition by three of the convicts.[122][123]
In November 2019, the Supreme Court dismissed a review petition from Akshay pleading for mercy. In doing so, the court retained the death sentence. After the verdict, Akshay's lawyer told the Supreme Court that he would appeal to the President. For this, he should be given three weeks time.[124][125] In January 2019, a five-judge bench of the Supreme Court rejected the curative petitions of convicts, Vinay Sharma and Mukesh.[125]
On 7 January 2020 a death warrant was issued for the Nirbhaya rapists by a Delhi court, setting an execution date of 22 January 2020 at 7am IST in Tihar Jail.[126][127][128]
Government authorities and the victim's mother alleged that the four convicts were "intentionally delaying" and "frustrating" the legal process in this case by filing their please in stages, so that the execution could be postponed.[129] Under the prison rules, if a case has more than one convicts awaiting death penalty and one of them moves a mercy plea then the execution of all the convicts would be need to be postponed till a decision is made on the pending mercy plea.[129]
Mercy plea to the President of India
Convict Mukesh filed a mercy plea. The Delhi government made a recommendation to reject the plea and forwarded it to the Lieutenant Governor. Deputy Chief Minister of Delhi, Manish Sisodia stated that this action was taken at "lightning speed."[129]
On 17 January 2020, the president of India rejected the mercy plea of the convict Mukesh Singh. The home ministry had recommended the president that the plea should be rejected.[130]
Second and third death warrants
On 17 January 2020, hours after the rejection of the mercy plea, a Delhi court issued a second death warrant for the convicts to be hanged after a mandatory fourteen days gap on 1 February at 6 am.[131] The fourteen days reprieve was provided in accordance with law which states that the convicts awaiting an execution must have a reprieve after their mercy plea is rejected.[131] During the same hearing, the court also rejected a plea by the convict Mukesh to postpone the execution.[131]
On 17 January, convict Pawan appealed to the Supreme Court against the Delhi High Court order that rejected his claim that Pawan was a juvenile during the crime in 2012.[125] On 31 January, a Delhi court stayed the death warrant. The judge did not issue a fresh warrant for their execution. The lawyer cited Rule 836 of the prison manual which says that in a case where more than one person has been sentenced to death, the execution cannot take place unless all the convicts have exhausted their legal options.[132]
On 17 February 2020, a third death warrant was issued by the court with the execution date as 3 March 2020 at 6 am.[133] On 4 March 2020, a fourth death warrant was issued by court with the execution date as 20 March 2020 at 5.30 am.
Public protests
After the incident
Public protests took place in New Delhi on 21 December 2012 at India Gate and Raisina Hill, the latter being the location of both the Parliament of India and Rashtrapati Bhavan, the official residence of the President of India. Thousands of protesters clashed with police and battled Rapid Action Force units.[134] Demonstrators were baton charged,[135] shot with water cannon and tear gas shells, and arrested.[136]
Similar protests occurred throughout the country. More than 600 women belonging to various organisations demonstrated in Bangalore.[137][138] Thousands of people silently marched in Kolkata.[139] Protests occurred online as well on the social networking sites Facebook and WhatsApp, with users replacing their profile images with a black dot symbol.[140] Tens of thousands signed an online petition protesting the incident.[141]
Yoga guru Baba Ramdev and former Army chief General Vijay Kumar Singh were among the demonstrators who clashed with Delhi Police at Jantar Mantar.[142] On 24 December, activist Rajesh Gangwar started a hunger strike, saying about the accused men, "If my death shakes the system and gets them hanged, I am ready to die".[143] Gangwar ended his fast after 14 days, saying, "My fight to demand a strict law against rape will be continued in the future... I have dedicated myself for this cause".[144] Middle Finger Protests, a Chandigarh-based pressure group and NGO headed by human rights and social activist Prabhloch Singh, also played a key role in the agitations and protests in New Delhi
Seven metro rail stations in New Delhi were closed on 22 December to discourage protesters from gathering at Raisina Hill.[148] On 24 December, police blocked roads leading to India Gate and Raisina Hill to prevent possible mass protests, and closed nine metro stations, affecting thousands of transit patrons. News reporters were not allowed to reach India Gate and Raisina Hill. In addition to CrPC section 144, which disallows assembly of groups larger than five, curfew was imposed near the presidential residence.[149] The Hindustan Times accused police of using excessive force against the protestors, reporting that 375 tear gas canisters were used at India Gate and elsewhere in Delhi to disperse the crowds.[150] An article in First Post criticised the Indian government as well, saying that they failed to act positively or give credible assurances to the protesters and instead used police force, lathi-charging, pushing the media out of the scene, and shutting down metro rail stations.[151]
Police stated that peaceful protests had been "hijacked" by hooligans and political activists.[152]
During one protest, a police constable named Subhash Tomar collapsed and later died in hospital.[153] Two witnesses claimed that Tomar collapsed without being hit by any protesters, while a third disputed this.[154] Hospital doctors and the post-mortem gave contradictory reports: he died due to cardiac arrest, but it is not known if the heart attack was caused by blunt-force injuries that he suffered to his chest and neck.[155] Some experts state that his chest injuries may have been a side effect of the administration of CPR.[156][157] The Delhi Police arrested 8 young men and charged them with Tomar's murder and rioting at India Gate. Later in March 2013, the police admitted in the High Court they had no evidence against the eight and gave them a clean chit.[158] The youths said the move by the commissioner of police to charge them with murder had been "irresponsible".[159]
After the victim's death
After Jyoti Singh's death on 29 December 2012, protests were staged throughout India, including Kolkata, Chennai, Bengaluru, Hyderabad, Kochi, Thiruvananthapuram, Mumbai, Bhubaneswar and Visakhapatnam. Many of the mourners carried candles and wore black dress; some pasted black cloth across their mouths.[160]
The following day a large number of people staged protests near Jantar Mantar, New Delhi.[161] There were minor clashes between some groups of protesters and the police; the police then removed some protesters from the area.[161] One group of protesters also observed a one-day hunger strike at Jantar Mantar.[161] All roads leading to India Gate were closed by police and areas where protesters had gathered during the previous week were out of bounds to the public.[161] Some of the protesters drew graffiti and slogans on papers spread on the road, condemning the incident and demanding stricter laws and speedy judgement.[162] The BJP renewed its demand for a special parliament session to discuss the case and to adopt stricter laws on crime against women.[57]
New Year's celebrations were scaled down to a large extent, with the Indian armed forces and some clubs and hotels in Delhi cancelling their New Year parties.[163]
The Indian protests also sparked protests across South Asia, including marches and rallies in Nepal, Sri Lanka, Pakistan and Bangladesh. In Nepal, hundreds of demonstrators in Kathmandu called for legal reforms and an overhaul of attitudes to women. In Bangladesh the human rights group Ain o Salish Kendra (ASK) said the protests in Delhi had given fresh impetus to protests against sexual violence. According to an ASK spokesperson, "although previous demonstrations on similar issues were largely dominated by women, men were now protesting too. The protests had also drawn people from a broad range of society
In Paris, people participated in a march to the Indian embassy where a petition was handed over asking for action to make India safer for women.[165]
An author for the South Asia Analysis Group explained the protests as expressions of middle-class angst arising out of a collapse of a social contract between them and the liberal state.[166] New Delhi has the highest number of sex crimes among India's major cities. Police figures show a rape reported on average every 18 hours; reported rape cases rose by nearly 17 percent between 2007 and 2011.[167] Only one of the 706 rape cases filed in Delhi in 2012 saw a successful conviction against the attacker.[76] Between 16 December and 4 January 501 calls for harassment and 64 calls for rape were recorded by the Delhi Police, but only four were followed up by inquiries.[164] The regional programme director for U.N. Women South Asia said, "There are rape cases in almost all cities and rural areas, where the victim dies immediately because of the brutality of the crime ... This time, it was like, 'Wake up.'"[168]
Reactions
Members of the Indian parliament demanded severe punishment for the perpetrators. The then Leader of the Opposition in the Lok Sabha, Sushma Swaraj, stated: "The rapists should be hanged".[169] Chairperson of the then ruling United Progressive Alliance Sonia Gandhi visited the Safdarjang Hospital and met doctors on duty in the anaesthesia and surgery departments for an update on the woman's health.[170] Bahujan Samaj Party chief, Mayawati, said that proper investigation was required, and that "action should be so strict that no one should dare to act in such a manner again".[169] Actress and member of the Rajya Sabha, Jaya Bachchan said that she was "terribly disturbed" over the incident, and felt "ashamed" sitting in the House, feeling "helpless" for "not being able to do anything".[170] Meira Kumar, the then Speaker of the Lok Sabha, told reporters a "new law should be brought in and must get passed to ensure the safety of women."[171] She went on to say: "The laws at present are not enough, we need stricter laws."[171][172]
Sheila Dixit, who at that time was the Chief Minister of Delhi, said that she did not have the courage to meet the victim and described Delhi as a "rape capital" in interviews.[173] She said that senior police officials should be held accountable for the failure to take adequate measures to stop such incidents and called for "immediate setting up of fast-track courts to try rape cases and to get justice in a time-bound manner".[174] The three constables who had refused to take action upon Ram Adhar's complaint of robbery were suspended for dereliction of duty.
On 24 December 2012, in his first official reaction after the incident, Prime Minister Manmohan Singh appealed for calm, stressing that "violence will serve no purpose".[175] In a televised address, he assured that all possible efforts would be made to ensure the safety of women in India. Singh expressed empathy, saying: "As a father of three daughters I feel as strongly about the incident as each one of you".[175] As a tribute to Nirbhaya, the prime minister cancelled all his official events to celebrate the new year.[176] Then Chief Minister of Uttar Pradesh, Akhilesh Yadav, announced a package of financial assistance ₹2 million (US$28,000) and a government job to Pandey's family.[177]
Speaking out against the protesters, President Pranab Mukherjee's son Abhijit Mukherjee argued that the women protesters did not appear to him to be students, saying, "What's basically happening in Delhi is a lot like Egypt or elsewhere, where there's something called the Pink Revolution, which has very little connection with ground realities. In India, staging candle-lit marches, going to discothèques ... I can see many beautiful women among them – highly dented-painted ... [but] I have grave doubts whether they're students ..."[178] The remark was widely condemned as sexist.[179] His sister Sharmistha said that she and their father the president both disapproved.[180] Then Maharashtra Chief Minister Prithviraj Chavan also expressed disapproval.[181] Abhijit quickly withdrew his comment and apologised.[182] Spiritual guru Asaram Bapu also provoked extensive criticism from the public[183] by saying that the victim was also to blame for her own assault because she could have stopped the attack if she had "chanted God's name and fallen at the feet of the attackers".[184]
International
The American embassy released a statement on 29 December 2012, offering their condolences to Nirbhaya's family and stated "we also recommit ourselves to changing attitudes and ending all forms of gender-based violence, which plagues every country in the world".[185] Nirbhaya was posthumously awarded one of the 2013 International Women of Courage Awards of the US State Department. The citation stated that "for millions of Indian women, her personal ordeal, perseverance to fight for justice, and her family's continued bravery is helping to lift the stigma and vulnerability that drive violence against women."[186]
The crime of rape became a capital offence in India following the rape. Indian politician Mulayam Singh Yadav opposed this change in the law, saying that "Boys will be boys. Boys commit mistakes".[187] Two years later, in response to these comments and another incident of rape that took place in Uttar Pradesh where Yadav's party was governing, UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon said "We say no to the dismissive, destructive attitude of, 'Boys will be boys'".,[188] and stated, "Violence against women must never be accepted, never excused, never tolerated. Every girl and woman has the right to be respected, valued and protected".[189] UN Women called on the Government of India and the Government of Delhi "to do everything in their power to take up radical reforms, ensure justice and reach out with robust public services to make women's lives more safe and secure"
In the wake of remarks against India in Western media, Jessica Valenti, writing in The Nation, argued that such rapes are also common in the United States, but US commentators exhibit a double standard in denying or minimising their systemic nature while simultaneously attacking India for an alleged rape culture.[191] Author and activist Eve Ensler, who organised One Billion Rising, a global campaign to end violence against women and girls, said that the gang rape and murder was a turning point in India and around the world. Ensler said that she had traveled to India at the time of the rape and murder and she commented:
After having worked every day of my life for the last 15 years on sexual violence, I have never seen anything like that, where sexual violence broke through the consciousness and was on the front page, nine articles in every paper every day, in the centre of every discourse, in the centre of the college students' discussions, in the centre of any restaurant you went in. And I think what's happened in India, India is really leading the way for the world. It's really broken through. They are actually fast-tracking laws. They are looking at sexual education. They are looking at the bases of patriarchy and masculinity and how all that leads to sexual violence.
ليست هناك تعليقات:
إرسال تعليق