The judge read out the charges against each of the convicts and told them about the punishment their charges attracted, after which each of them were asked if they had anything to say. Upadhyay, who was called last, waited till the charges were read out. When the question was asked again, he responded in an even tone, “My position is already clear. I have done nothing wrong, I have committed no crime. But the court has found me guilty and I am not going to beg for any mercy. Whatever punishment the court feels appropriate, I will accept it. I still have faith in the law and judicial system.”

The other three convicts, meanwhile, were noticeably disturbed even as they entered the court premises. Vijay, when speaking to the judge, broke down and, between sobs, managed to convey that his three children were unable to get admission to any school due to his imprisonment. Pradeep, too, spoke about his family and their hardship. Shivkumar, meanwhile, said, “I was 18 years old when I went to jail and I have spent eight years behind the bars. My only plea is that the time I have already served be counted in my sentence.”

Poll

Do you know someone with Tourette`s syndrome?

Yes 33.33%

No 33.33%

Maybe 33.33%

Submit

View All In Poll

During arguments, Special Public Prosecutor Vaibhav Bagade sought death penalty, saying that the matter was fit to be counted in the rarest of rare cases. “The photographs of the crime scene, which have been submitted as evidence, are enough to indicate that this was a voluntarily committed heinous crime against two people, with no compelling circumstances or unnecessary provocation. The relationship between the murderer and the victim can also not be overlooked,” he said.

The lawyers representing Vijay, Pradeep and Shivkumar sought minimum punishment for them, arguing that they had no past criminal records and were the sole earning members of their families. Meanwhile, advocate Raja Thakare, representing Upadhyay, said that the approach towards cases should be more liberal, and that life imprisonment in such cases is the rule, and not death sentences. He further argued that the requirement here is reformation.

Referring to Upadhyay’s own remarks to the judge, Thakare said, “The manner of my client should not be considered arrogant. Not showing repentance is not arrogance. He means that he cannot plead his case further, and hence, is not seeking any mercy.” The court’s decision is expected on Monday.