The Gender Council of the Delhi Union of Journalists (DUJ) is outraged at the Judge’s observations on the murderer of journalist colleague, Shivani Bhatnagar.
In a joint statement the Gender Council Chairperson Sujata Madhok, Anjali Deshpande Secretary Gender Council, S.K. Pande President DUJ, T.K. Rajalakshmi Secretary DUJ, Dinesh Chandra Vice President DUJ, and Javed Faridi General Secretary DUJ said, the observations of Additional Sessions Judge Rajender Kumar Shastri that: "except for this crime R.K. Sharma was an asset to this nation" and the references to his "distinguished services" and his "contribution to the society as an IPS" reflect an excessive and misplaced sympathy for a man convicted for murder. The judge seems to be more impressed with the IPS pedigree than outraged by the criminality of an IPS officer which is tantamount to a betrayal of trust society places in law enforcers.
Judge Shastri also said that "incarceration in jail is deprivation of personal liberty. A life devoid of these is nothing more than existence." What about the deprivation of Shivani’s life? Or is that to be condoned because she was spared an ‘animal existence’ as defined by the judge? In a country where thousands of under trials languish in prisons such empathy with a criminal who was entrusted with enforcing the law clearly displays a clear class bias too.
The Gender Council underlines the fact that as a senior police officer Sharma was oath bound to observe the law, not flout it for personal gain. He deserved exemplary punishment. Sharma meted out a life-long sentence to Shivani Bhatnagar’s newborn baby by depriving the child of its mother’s love and care. In the circumstances it seems ridiculous for the court to lament over the fact that Sharma had to be given the minimum life sentence.
The judge seems totally oblivious to the trauma and loss of privacy that her husband and other members of her family suffered because an IPS officer thought he could get away with murder, planned and plotted cold bloodedly.
The DUJ Gender Council believes that the judiciary must uphold the law without any gender, caste or class bias, and not provide alibis for law breakers who belong to influential sections of society. No one, least of all the police, should be above the law of the land.