‘In rape cases, in-camera is the norm’

Updated - December 04, 2021 11:40 pm IST

Published - January 08, 2013 01:52 am IST - New Delhi:

Turmoil took over the pre-trial proceedings of the Delhi gang rape trial on Monday when some lawyers objected to a few advocates coming forward to defend the accused. The disruptions did not die down even after Metropolitan Magistrate Namrita Aggarwal entered the courtroom at 12.30 p.m., when the five accused were to be produced. Advocate Manohar Lal Sharma said the relatives of some of the accused had asked him to represent them, and he was coming forward to do so in the interest of fair trial. Ms. Aggarwal asked him to visit the accused at Tihar Central Jail to get their permission. Another lawyer V.K. Anand then asked the court to appoint him amicus curiae.

At this juncture, Additional Public Prosecutor Rajiv Mohan renewed an application he had moved earlier, seeking in-camera proceedings. He argued that in rape cases, “in-camera proceedings were the general norm, and open trial was the exception,” and there was apprehension about the safety of the accused.

One lawyer proclaimed: Jab Jantar Mantar se public nahi hadthi, court se vakil kaise hatenge (When the public stay put at Jantar Mantar, how lawyers can leave the court.)

The magistrate then went back to her chamber; by 1.30 p.m., the official lunch-hour for the courts, many of the agitated lawyers had left. Ms. Aggarwal was finally able to come out and dictate her order without interruption.

“An unprecedented situation has been created where members of the Bar and public persons, unconnected with the case, have started converging in the courtroom. The courtroom has been jam-packed and a lot of disturbance created. The persons who have thus assembled and are present inside court, not connected with the case, have been repeatedly asked to wait outside so that the court proceedings can continue, but with no effect. It is a case of the crowd virtually occupying every inch of space in the courtroom even to the extent of standing next to the reader and the stenographer,” the magistrate said.

The in-charge of the Saket court lockup also informed the magistrate that he was unable to produce the accused in the court for want of “safe passage” and space in the courtroom. After the courtroom emptied, the five accused were produced and supplied with copies of the charge sheet. The next hearing is scheduled for January 10.

Meanwhile, two lawyers approached District and Additional Sessions Judge R. K. Gauba against the in-camera proceedings and the curb on reporting. The matter will be heard on January 9 when Mr. Gauba will consider Ms. Aggarwal’s order and the findings of a public prosecutor who is expected to enquire with Mr. Rajiv Mohan what transpired in the magisterial court.

0 / 0
Sign in to unlock member-only benefits!
  • Access 10 free stories every month
  • Save stories to read later
  • Access to comment on every story
  • Sign-up/manage your newsletter subscriptions with a single click
  • Get notified by email for early access to discounts & offers on our products
Sign in


Comments have to be in English, and in full sentences. They cannot be abusive or personal. Please abide by our community guidelines for posting your comments.

We have migrated to a new commenting platform. If you are already a registered user of The Hindu and logged in, you may continue to engage with our articles. If you do not have an account please register and login to post comments. Users can access their older comments by logging into their accounts on Vuukle.