<p>Judge B V Guddali convicted Shivkumar for all the three charges levelled against him—of kidnap, rape and murder. The quantum of punishment will be pronounced on October 8. <br />Before the pronouncement, the judge asked Shivkumar whether he had confessed to the crime. The latter stated that he was innocent and was forced to confess. <br /><br />Shivkumar, who had expected leniency from the court, was visibly shocked at the verdict, delivered in a room jam-packed with lawyers, litigants and police personnel. Lengthy arguments preceded the verdict, with the accused standing inside the witness box not quite understanding what was going on.<br /><br />True justice<br /><br />Arguing for maximum punishment for the accused before the verdict, Pratibha’s counsel V K Patil said only a deterrent punishment can uphold the value of true justice. “It was a pre-planned, cold blooded act done without provocation. Such an act has created terror among working women in the city and the guilty should be awarded death punishment.<br />“Leniency to the guilty will have an adverse impact on the society,” Patil argued. However, Shiv kumar’s lawyer Shankarappa urged the court to take a lenient view since Shivkumar had to take care of his family including his aged parents. <br /><br />The lawyer also cited the infamous Shakeera Khalili/ Swami Shradhananda case where the court had given the accused life imprisonment instead of capital punishment. Reacting to the court’s decision, Pratibha’s mother, who fought a near-lone battle said, “My happiness has gone with my daughter. I am satisfied that the court has given me justice even after five years. The punishment should be exemplary so that no one can gather courage to do such things to any girl in future.”<br /><br />To Shivkumar’s contention that he deserved leniency as he had a wife and aged parents to look after, Pratibha’s mother said, “What about me, I am all alone, my only daughter has also gone. Let us wait for October 8 and see what is the sentence.”<br /><br />Pratibha’s mangled body was found on the outskirts of the City on December 14, 2005, a day after she left home for night shift. She was seen getting into the cab driven by Shivkumar, who worked for the taxi service hired by the IT firm. Investigations later proved Shivkumar had called Pratibha on her mobile the night she went missing.<br />The court trial of the case began on January 7, 2007 before the seventh Fast Track Sessions Judge K Sukanya, who was later replaced by Judge J S Deshpande. <br /><br />Both Sukanya and Deshpande recorded evidences of 71 witnesses in the case. Judge Beraladinni, who came next, recorded the cross examination of the witnesses. The case was transferred to the present court when recording of the statement of Shivkumar in reply to those of the witnesses was being done.<br /><br /><br /></p>
<p>Judge B V Guddali convicted Shivkumar for all the three charges levelled against him—of kidnap, rape and murder. The quantum of punishment will be pronounced on October 8. <br />Before the pronouncement, the judge asked Shivkumar whether he had confessed to the crime. The latter stated that he was innocent and was forced to confess. <br /><br />Shivkumar, who had expected leniency from the court, was visibly shocked at the verdict, delivered in a room jam-packed with lawyers, litigants and police personnel. Lengthy arguments preceded the verdict, with the accused standing inside the witness box not quite understanding what was going on.<br /><br />True justice<br /><br />Arguing for maximum punishment for the accused before the verdict, Pratibha’s counsel V K Patil said only a deterrent punishment can uphold the value of true justice. “It was a pre-planned, cold blooded act done without provocation. Such an act has created terror among working women in the city and the guilty should be awarded death punishment.<br />“Leniency to the guilty will have an adverse impact on the society,” Patil argued. However, Shiv kumar’s lawyer Shankarappa urged the court to take a lenient view since Shivkumar had to take care of his family including his aged parents. <br /><br />The lawyer also cited the infamous Shakeera Khalili/ Swami Shradhananda case where the court had given the accused life imprisonment instead of capital punishment. Reacting to the court’s decision, Pratibha’s mother, who fought a near-lone battle said, “My happiness has gone with my daughter. I am satisfied that the court has given me justice even after five years. The punishment should be exemplary so that no one can gather courage to do such things to any girl in future.”<br /><br />To Shivkumar’s contention that he deserved leniency as he had a wife and aged parents to look after, Pratibha’s mother said, “What about me, I am all alone, my only daughter has also gone. Let us wait for October 8 and see what is the sentence.”<br /><br />Pratibha’s mangled body was found on the outskirts of the City on December 14, 2005, a day after she left home for night shift. She was seen getting into the cab driven by Shivkumar, who worked for the taxi service hired by the IT firm. Investigations later proved Shivkumar had called Pratibha on her mobile the night she went missing.<br />The court trial of the case began on January 7, 2007 before the seventh Fast Track Sessions Judge K Sukanya, who was later replaced by Judge J S Deshpande. <br /><br />Both Sukanya and Deshpande recorded evidences of 71 witnesses in the case. Judge Beraladinni, who came next, recorded the cross examination of the witnesses. The case was transferred to the present court when recording of the statement of Shivkumar in reply to those of the witnesses was being done.<br /><br /><br /></p>
