rambabu wrote:

Whatever i said is from the web link you gave and News Channels. I don't think i repeated any thing in this case.

That is exactly why the web link was given. So that no one has to quote obvious facts again and again.

As usual you will remain in denial ...I guess it is too much to ask you to have some restraint and concentrate on quality while posting your response ..

Death sentence is awarded in crimes that are considered rarest of rare.  No doubt, the offenders in Nirbhaya case deserved the extreme punishment. Yet it can be said without fear of contradiction that the extreme punishment is more to satisfy the excessive publicity  media and large candle light processions. There are many other cases of similar nature but courts award lower quantum of punishment. It is dangerous if courts start acting more on media coverage and public outrage rather than on facts and circumstances of case.  

Death sentence given to butchers who raped, mutilated and murdered a young woman is extreme punishment ? this is amazing and shows how rape is always trivialised by men , so no wonder that men and the netas of this country go ahead and say men will be men and one should not make much of such things  !!!

Gulshan Kumar Ajmani wrote:

Death sentence is awarded in crimes that are considered rarest of rare.  No doubt, the offenders in Nirbhaya case deserved the extreme punishment. Yet it can be said without fear of contradiction that the extreme punishment is more to satisfy the excessive publicity  media and large candle light processions. There are many other cases of similar nature but courts award lower quantum of punishment. It is dangerous if courts start acting more on media coverage and public outrage rather than on facts and circumstances of case.  

That is exactly where the power and efficiency of media is put to test. It's role is to highlight such issues so that justice has its reach in all corners of the country. Some cases cover the frontpage for days and unfortunately, some are confined to a small column at the corner of the newspaper.

That being said, a case as brutal as this one was naturally going to get media coverage. 

Abhishek Sharma wrote:

Gulshan Kumar Ajmani wrote:

Death sentence is awarded in crimes that are considered rarest of rare.  No doubt, the offenders in Nirbhaya case deserved the extreme punishment. Yet it can be said without fear of contradiction that the extreme punishment is more to satisfy the excessive publicity  media and large candle light processions. There are many other cases of similar nature but courts award lower quantum of punishment. It is dangerous if courts start acting more on media coverage and public outrage rather than on facts and circumstances of case.  

That is exactly where the power and efficiency of media is put to test. It's role is to highlight such issues so that justice has its reach in all corners of the country. Some cases cover the frontpage for days and unfortunately, some are confined to a small column at the corner of the newspaper.

That being said, a case as brutal as this one was naturally going to get media coverage. 

I stress that court should give verdict on basis of facts of case, law and material on record. Media trial must not affect court any way. Media coverage must not affect court. If this happens, the verdict of court may be unfair.  

I doubt if our supreme court judges are so weak as to be led by public opinion if that is the case , why was Salman Khan spared again and again? it was because of shoddy police investigation.. I am sure everything has been looked into  in this case before pronouncing a judgment

Gulshan Kumar Ajmani wrote:

Abhishek Sharma wrote:

Gulshan Kumar Ajmani wrote:

Death sentence is awarded in crimes that are considered rarest of rare.  No doubt, the offenders in Nirbhaya case deserved the extreme punishment. Yet it can be said without fear of contradiction that the extreme punishment is more to satisfy the excessive publicity  media and large candle light processions. There are many other cases of similar nature but courts award lower quantum of punishment. It is dangerous if courts start acting more on media coverage and public outrage rather than on facts and circumstances of case.  

That is exactly where the power and efficiency of media is put to test. It's role is to highlight such issues so that justice has its reach in all corners of the country. Some cases cover the frontpage for days and unfortunately, some are confined to a small column at the corner of the newspaper.

That being said, a case as brutal as this one was naturally going to get media coverage. 

I stress that court should give verdict on basis of facts of case, law and material on record. Media trial must not affect court any way. Media coverage must not affect court. If this happens, the verdict of court may be unfair.  

The Court should remain unswayed by the publicity and the media coverage. There's no denying it. That's why I've said in the previous posts that this particular case took less time to come to a conclusion as compared to other cases of crime against women which don't get publicized too much. That's where our system needs to improve.

Best decision by the supreme court.Those guys surely deserve this punishment.PERFECT.

That is what majority of the people feel except for a few long faced " intellectual class that is more humane than the rest " and prefer to fight for the cause of the rapists ...you ask then.about the girl, they become vague but are full of energy and passion while discussing the rights of the rapists/butchers ! The thing is they have to be different from the rest or at least pretend..