Click to play videoNew Delhi: When the moment of truth finally arrived for Manu Sharma - guilty of the murder of model Jessica Lall at a swinging late-night party in a south Delhi restaurant seven years ago - not even the much-touted defence could turn fortunes in his favour.
Neither could his being a political prodigee – Manu alias Siddharth Vashisht is the son of Haryana Congressman Venod Sharma – save him from getting a life term in a case that was revived by a consistent public outcry and a strong media debate.
In fact, it was a triple blow for Manu, who was acquitted in February on the same charges by a lower court.
On Wednesday, the Delhi High Court sentenced Manu to life imprisonment for the murder, four years imprisonment for possession of illegal arms under the Arms Act and another four-year jail term for criminal conspiracy.
He was also slapped with a Rs-50,000 fine that would be paid to Jessica’s family.
Manu’s lawyer R K Nasseem said he will challenge the verdict in Supreme Court. In the arguments leading up to the quantum, while the prosecution pushed for death penalty for Manu, the High Court Bench comprising R S Sodhi and P K Bhasin turned it down saying it was not the "rarest of rare cases" and that there was a possibility of "the convict being reformed".
What does life term mean? According to a Supreme Court judgement, life term must be treated as imprisonment for the remaining period of the convict's natural life. The apex court reiterated that life imprisonment is not equivalent to imprisonment for 14 or 20 years. |
But, it was perhaps Delhi Police counsel Mukta Gupta’s argument that summed it all up.
Countering the defence argument urging leniency, Gupta said, "it was writ large on the face of record that no sign of any remorse had been shown by the convict during the trial".
Partners in crime
Manu’s friends and co-accused Vikas Yadav and Amardeep Singh Gill alias Tony were sentenced to four years rigorous imprisonment each for aiding and abetment of the crime and will pay a fine of Rs 2,000 each.
Gill - who was convicted under sections 201 (destruction of evidence) and 120-B (criminal conspiracy) - had moved the court on Tuesday seeking bail and stating that all the offences under these sections were bailable under the law.
But while announcing the quantum for the duo, the Bench agreed with prosecution that the two knew the gravity of offence yet they shielded the facts and tried to destroy the evidence.
"We are of the view that Tony Gill cannot be released by giving benefit under Probation of Offender's Act," the Bench said.
What it means for Sabrina Lall
The verdict came as a huge relief for Jessica’s sister Sabrina Lall, who has been thanking the media and the public profusely for having stood by her throughout.
She described Wednesday’s sentencing as a “closure” of the case. "There is a certain amount of closure to the long drawn case. I couldn’t have asked God for more. I don’t believe in death sentence so I’m very happy with the judgment,” she said.
But Sabrina, who has courted much media attention over the long-drawn trial, remained bitter. “Life sentence would be a true and fitting judgement. Death sentence would mean his family will suffer. I want him to suffer and I hope it’s a long life sentence. I want the boy who killed Jessica to spend long years in prison,” she said.
The Delhi Police, which had come under severe scrutiny for allegedly botching up the case, claimed the judgement was a vindication of their stand.
Senior IPS officer Amod Kanth, who was the then Delhi Police joint commissioner and oversaw the murder investigation, congratulated the Police team and said, "The judgement is a strong vindication. We feel totally satisfied. The entire judgment is based on the initial investigations. The officers should be given kudos. Unfortunately, there is some wrong information being given,” he said.
Kanth denied that the court had passed adverse comments against the investigation and Delhi Police.
Turncoats in trouble
It was not just Manu Sharma, Vikas Yadav and Amardeep Singh Gill who faced judgement day in the Jessica Lall murder case on Wednesday.
The Delhi High Court has also directed the Delhi police to take action against all the 29 witnesses who turned hostile, including small-time actor and model Shyan Munshi.
JESSICA CASE TIMELINE |
 April 29, 1999: A party was in full swing at south Delhi’s Tamarind Court restaurant where hundreds of high-profile guests including a top ranking Delhi Police officer were present when Jessica Lall, the model tending the bar, was shot dead. An FIR was lodged by model-turned-actor Shyan Munshi who was standing next to her. In the following week, four men present in the party were charged with killing Jessica. The main accused were all men who wielded influence. |
| November 2000: The trial began and five others - including former Test cricketer Yograj Singh - were charged with harbouring the accused. But less than a year, later the entire case of the prosecution weakened as witness after witness turned hostile and this included key witness Shyan Munshi who told the court, "I can’t read Hindi and hence do not know what the police wrote”. Interestingly, Shayan was accompanied to court by Manu Sharma's lawyer. By this time charges of police complicity in favour of the accused were doing the rounds. |
| February 2006: Manu Sharma got out on bail in 2002, and four years later on February 21, 2006 the trial court acquitted Manu and the eight others for lack of evidence. Public outcry greeted the judgement and Delhi High Court took cognizance of the issue. On February 26 Delhi Police's special investigation team was constituted to probe the conduct of the investigating officers. |
| March 6, 2006: A second FIR in the case was lodged. |
| October 3, 2006: Hearing of the appeal against the trial court's order begins. |
| November 2006: The appeal went through its share of ups and downs before the final verdict was reserved on November 29. |
(For updates you can share with your friends, follow IBNLive on Facebook, Twitter and Google+)
displayed with permission. Use of the CNN name and/or logo on or as part of CNN-IBN does not derogate from the intellectual property rights of Cable News Network in respect of them.