Jharkhand Judge murder case: Incident shook judiciary, led to fear among officials’ kin, says judge
Additional Sessions Judge (ASJ) Rajinikanth Pathak, in the sentencing order in the murder case of Jharkhand Judge Uttam Anand, has outlined how the incident shook the judiciary as well as the citizens and left the judicial officers in shock. An atmosphere of fear was created among the family members of the Judicial Officer.
ASJ Pathak had on July 28 convicted Lakhan Verma and Rahul Verma under sections 302 (murder) and 201 (missing evidence) and 34 (common intention) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and sentenced them to “rigorous imprisonment till death”. was sentenced. On August 6, a copy of the judgment was made available on Friday.
In the sentencing order, the court said: “No one could have imagined that a judge of Jharkhand judiciary would be murdered like this. This incident not only shook the judicial fraternity of the country but also the citizens… After the incident, there was an atmosphere of fear among the family members of judicial officers and the people of the country. Common people were compelled to think that if this can happen to a judge, then what will happen to the common citizen… the culprits should be punished severely.
When the defence pleaded for leniency, the court said: “…it is difficult to accept the prayer that a lenient view is taken in the matter, especially when the murder of a judicial officer has been planned by the convicts.” if they are released, it will send a wrong message to society… Also, they may commit the same crime again, with no respect and respect for human life and the law of the land.”
The verdict came a year after an autorickshaw rammed Judge Anand directly on an empty road in Dhanbad, killing him.
Defence counsel Kumar Bimlendu had argued that it was not a case of murder as there was no motive. According to court records, the defence submitted that it was the ‘system’ that ‘killed’ the judge, adding: “…moreover, it was the system which killed the judge… Because he was alive for four hours, he was released by the doctors of SNMMCH, as is the case with the common man.
Secondly, the gate of Sadar Hospital was closed, there is no state-of-the-art trauma center in the nearby town.
However, the court held that the motive for sentencing was “not necessary” and that the hit was “intentional and willful”. Judge Pathak wrote in the order: “… I feel that the motive is not warranted and it cannot stand in the way of punishment. Further, from the perusal of the evidence available on record, the prosecution can prove That the intention of the auto driver as well as his co-assistant was clear and intentional.