FINAL SUBMISSION ON THE TOPIC

JESSICA LAL MURDER CASE

MARCH 2018

SUBMITTED TO: - SUBMITTED BY: -

Received by……………….
Time ….…….
On date …………….
 CONTENTS

S. No Particulars
1. Abstract
2. Introduction
3. Review of Literature
4. Comparative Study
5. Similar Cases
6. Conclusion
7. Future Scope
8. Bibliography
9. Plagiarism Report

ABSTRACT

JESSICA LAL MURDER CASE

Nineteen years back, in 1999, a young woman, Jessica Lal, had been shot dead
with a bullet to her forehead by Manu Sharma, son of a Haryana Congress
minister, when she was working as a celebrity barmaid, because she refused to
serve him a drink after the bar had shut. The case stretched for years, without
any major development but finally in 2006, Manu Sharma along with other
accused were found guilty and justice was served. In this article, we will see the
details of the murder, facts of the case proceedings and the impact of the case on
the society. As the case involves several prominent people, we will also see how
media and political indulgence can influence the case.

INTRODUCTION
At midnight of 30th April 1999, Jessica Lal, an Indian model, who was working
as a barmaid in an unlicensed bar at South Delhi, was shot dead. All the
evidences pointed towards Manu Sharma, s/o Vinod Sharma, then MP of
Haryana, of killing her as she refused to serve him with liquor, after the bar was
closed. During the subsequent trial, the prime eyewitness Shayan Munshi and
many others turned hostile in the Court which resulted in the suspects getting
acquitted due to lack of evidence in February 2006.
The acquittal sparked outrage in the Indian middle class and spurred the media
into donning an activist role, which led the prosecution to appeal further. A
sting operation was also conducted by a news magazine Tahelka which showed
that witnesses had been bribed and pressured into withdrawing their initial
testimony. The Delhi High Court conducted proceedings on a fast track basis
and Manu Sharma was found guilty of having murdered Lal. He was sentenced
to life imprisonment on 20 December 2006.

REVIEW OF LITERATURE

 BOOKS: -
1. Criminal Law
By- PSA Pillai
The book is justifiably known as most archetypical text on IPC, 1860. This
book has comprehensively covered all aspects of Criminal Law along with
detailed analysis on all the categories of offences assimilated in the code.
The book covers almost all the landmark judgements which revolve around
particular topics. The book largely deals with Culpable Homicide along with
subtopics mens rea, murder, scope of section 300, culpable homicide not
amounting to murder, exceptions, negligence, suicide and many such topics.
The book enables one to understand the crisp of IPC, in student friendly
language, helping them to understand the law.

2. Criminology Penology and Victimology

By- Ahmad Siddhque
Ahmad Siddique’s Criminology & Penology is a successful book on the
subject. The book deals with the subject ‘criminology and penology and
victimology’ and is concerned with the nature, causes, prevention,
punishment, administration etc., of crime. It largely focuses on the
definitions of crime with reference to criminal law. As a user guide and
manual for the law students, the book is designed as a route map to provide
an overview of criminology and penology. The legal interfacing of
criminological thinking is seldom attempted by legal scholars, though most
of the end users are groups from criminal justice administration.

3. Principles of the Law of Evidence

By- Dr. Avtar Singh
The book is an introduction to and a brief study of the principle of the Law
of Evidence that underline the provisions of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872.
The book largely deals with nature and function of the act, cause and effect,
motive and preparation, conspiracy, admissions, confessions, relevance to
judgement, opinions, proves, public documents, examination of witnesses
etc. The book due to its user-friendly language, proves as a classic literature
for understanding the Indian Evidence Act, 1872.

4. Code of Criminal Procedure

By- Ratanlal and Dheerajlal
The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, is a vehicle for indulgence of justice
with its applicability ranging from trial courts to the Supreme Court. It has
continuously evolved through legislative amendments as well as judicial
interpretations over the years to accept its present form. Ahmad Siddhque’s
commentary on the Code of the books deals various laws and procedures,
including witness tampering in reference to my case. The commentary has
throughout been written lucidly and carries section-wise discussions, which
places it amongst the most authoritative and leading commentaries on the
law of Criminal Procedure in India.

 LAW JOURNALS: -

1. Justice of Jessica (Florida State University Libraries)

By- Lisette Alvarez
( https://diginole.lib.fsu.edu/islandora/object/fsu:204451/datastream/PDF/view )
 The paper to explores the impact and implications of various aspects of the
Jessica Lal murder trial, understanding that many factors of Indian society
contributed to both the murder and the outcome. This paper focuses on a
number of specific aspects of the trial and assess their significance for
human rights issues: journalism in India, social media and public
participation in civic action, Indian film and its direct influence on the trial,
structural issues in the police and judicial system, purpose and actions of
local and international human rights organizations, and the ongoing 2011
anti-corruption movement in India.

2. Public Outrage and Criminal Justice: Lessons from Jessica

Lal case
By- Brendan O’Flaherty and Rajiv Sethi

( http://www.columbia.edu/~rs328/Jessica.pdf )

The journal deals with witness tampering and public outrage have
combined to affect judicial out-comes in a series of high-profile criminal
cases in India with reference to Jessica lal murder case. It also discusses
the possibility of public outrage turns out to be an effective constraint on
witness tampering. In many situations, greater media effectiveness can
improve the administration of justice, even when more obvious
improvements in judicial effectiveness cannot.

TOPIC DISCUSSION
On April 29th, 1999, Jessica Lal, a 34-year-old model, was working as a
celebrity bartender in a socialite party at Qutub Colonnade Restaurant in
Southwest Delhi. The bar had been officially closed by midnight. Around 2am
Siddharth Vashisht, better known as Manu Sharma and his friends entered the
bar and ordered liquor to which Jessica refused. Manu Sharma then offered her
Rs.1000 for it, which she turned down. Manu Sharma, in that fury took out a
22-calibre pistol and fired in air as a warning, but when she refused again,
Sharma fired again, which hit her at her temple and killed her before she was
rushed to the hospital.

Manu Sharma was fingered as the culprit by numerous witnesses, including

Jessica Lal’s fellow bartender Shayan Munshi, Bini Ramani’s husband, and a
handful of others. After the incident Manu Sharma and his friends, Vikas
Yadav, Alok Khanna and Amardeep Singh Gill went absconding but after two
days, Sharma's abandoned Tata Safari car was found in Noida, near Delhi.
After eluding police for some days, Gill and Khanna were arrested on 4 May
and Manu Sharma on 6 May, but the murder weapon was never recovered.
During police interrogation, Sharma initially confessed to the murder. However,
the confession was later dismissed as evidence due to a procedural technicality
committed by the police.
The case involved many prominent people. Manu Sharma himself was the son
of Venod Sharma, who was a former minister of the national government at the
time of the shooting and by the time of the subsequent trial was a minister in
the Haryana state government. Yadav was the son of D. P. Yadav, another state
politician. Singh managed the distribution of Maaza in Chandigarh.
On 21 February 2006, seven years after the case was opened, nine of the twelve
accused were acquitted, including Manu Sharma. The prosecution was affected
by 32 of their witnesses as they became hostile. These included Shayan Munshi,
Andleeb Sehgal, Karan Rajput, Shiv Lal Yadav and two ballistics experts, Roop
Singh and Prem Sagar. The main reason being the prime eye witness Shyan
Munshi changing his FIR statement and not identifying Manu Sharma and
introducing the two guns story.
But, during the trial Malini Ramani, a fashion designer and daughter of Bina
Ramani, the restaurant owner and a socialite, though wasn’t an eye witness of
the incident, identified Manu Sharma as the one who had asked for a drink
around 2 a.m. on April 30 (1999), she also said he was the one who had a rude
exchange of words with her and Jessica barely a minute before the model was
shot.
Even then, the prime suspects of the case were acquitted due to lack of
evidences, and justice was denied even after so many years.

The reaction to the verdict was one of outcry. Most noticeably among India's
urban middle class, the acquittal has released high frustration with corrupt law
enforcement bureaucracy and a deep disgust with the rich and famous who, by
all appearances, manipulated it to their advantage. Rallies, candlelit vigils and
marches took place. The protests were led by Prabhloch Singh, the founder of
the "Middle Finger Protests", better known as "Human Rights Protection
Group" from Manu Sharma's hometown Chandigarh.

V. N. Khare, a previous Chief Justice of India, verifiably criticised the trial

judge, saying that it ought to have been an "open and shut" case and that
occasionally when the police and the legal counsellors have associations with
the culprits, the judge ought to be somewhat proactive. He should attempt to get
to reality, and not depend absolutely on the proof given in court. Generally, the
legal is relied upon the confirmation gave by the investigative organizations,
however now when the circumstance is so terrible, the judges need to wake up,
be proactive and discover reality.

The Delhi police commissioner initiated an investigation to resolve things

which had gone wrong, and said that mainly it would inspect whether there had
been a conspiracy, possibly by tampering with the evidence.

The police petitioned in the High Court for a case review and on 22 March 2006
the court issued warrants against the nine defendants who had stood trial. Eight
of them were afterwards bailed in April, with confinements forced on their
capacity to leave the nation. The ninth defendant, Gill, had not been traced since
the original issue of warrants in March.

On 9 September 2006, news magazine Tehelka held a sting operation that was

shown on the TV channel STAR News. In the interview, he was led to believe
that the interviewers were producers for a film, and that they wished to audition
him. In the filmed interview, it is recorded that he clearly speaks, reads, and
understands Hindi. Another interview orchestrated by the magazine revealed
that large bribes were given to witnesses by Sharma’s father Venod to keep
them quiet about the case.

On 15 December 2006, the High Court held Sharma guilty based on existing
evidence, and also criticized the trial judge, S. L. Bhayana. On 20 December
2006, Sharma was sentenced with life imprisonment and a fine. The other
accused, Gill and Yadav, were fined and given four years' rigorous
imprisonment. An appeal for Sharma to be sentenced to death was rejected on
the grounds that the murder, though intentional, was not planned and Sharma
was not considered to be a threat to society.

Sharma's lawyer declared that they would appeal in Supreme Court because the
judgement was wrong in holding Bina Ramani to be a witness. Senior
advocate Ram Jethmalani, who represented Sharma in the Supreme Court,
attacked the High Court verdict, claiming that the media had prejudged the case
and conducted a campaign to vilify his client. The Supreme Court accepted that
there had been a component of "trial by media" but believed that it had not
affected the decision of the High Court. On 19 April 2010, the Supreme Court
of India approved the sentence.

In the case Shayan Munshi was the only eye witness to Jessica’s murder on
April 1999 as when she was shot and Manu and his friends ran out, it was
Shayan who rushed outside shouting "Someone has shot Jessica". Yet instead of
helping the police in nabbing the murderers, he surrendered to threatening and
drew major criticism for his conduct during the trial of the case. Munshi turned
hostile stating that he did not understand Hindi, the language that was used to
file the initial FIR by the Delhi Police. Munshi had also stated that Manu

Sharma was identified by the cops and not by him. Munshi was responsible in
introducing the 'two guns' theory while the case was being investigated which
also delayed the entire trial.

The Delhi High Court March 22, 2013 ordered that a perjury case be registered
against witnesses Munshi and Manocha for turning hostile during their
deposition in the murder trial.
The two witnesses who are credited with helping to convict Sharma are Bina
Ramani, and her daughter, Malini. Bina Ramani identified Manu Sharma,
Amardeep Singh Gil, Alok Khanna and Vikas Yadav as present at the
restaurant. Malini Ramani said she had overheard the conversation when Jessica
refused Manu Sharma a drink which led him to pull out his gun and both said
they saw Sharma shoot Jessica.  The Ramanis have repeatedly said that they
received death threats asking them to turn hostile in the case.
The Jessica Lal case struck a chord with middle-class India which saw it as a
classic example of an average family taking on rich and powerful opponents.
The trial also exposed the weaknesses of the legal system. The case stretched
for years without any major development, and one after another, key witnesses
turned hostile but finally justice was given.

COMPARITIVE STUDY
A witness is one of the crucial parts of the criminal justice system, as its stand
determines the very pillar of the decision of the case. Therefore, the honesty of
the witness’s testimony becomes the foundation of justice and hence the witness
is made to offer statement under oath. A witness must depose without force,
fear and pressure and out of his or her own free will and consent. The quality of
the statements given by a witness also determines the pace of a particular case.
Due to this, the parties often threaten the witnesses, turning them hostile and
interfering with the fair administration of justice. The threat to the lives of
witnesses is one of the primary reasons for them to retract their earlier
statements during the trial. Political pressure, self-generated fear of police and
the legal system, absence of fear of the law of perjury, an unsympathetic law
enforcement machinery and corruption are some of the other reasons for
witnesses turning hostile in the course of trial.
There are witness protection programmes in a large number of countries all over
the world. Sadly, India still lacks a well-functioning witness protection
programme despite various attempts to improve it. Infrastructure and
implementation continue to be poor and there are still a vast number of cases
where the witnesses turn hostile.

Witness protection in United States of America: -

The United States Federal Witness Security Program, known as the Witness
Security (WITSEC) Program is one of the most developed of all existing
Witness Protection programs in the world. 
The main purpose is to keep the witnesses safe so that they can testify at trials
that could convict members of organized crime, dangerous criminals, gangs or
terrorist networks. The Program helps in providing housing, medical care, job
training and assistance in obtaining employment and subsistence funding until
the witness becomes self-sufficient.

The witness and family members sign a Memorandum of Understanding which

is coordinated by multiple government agencies, in total secrecy. The witness
receives a briefing by Marshals Service personnel and if he/she agrees to enter
the program, he/she and his/her family are immediately removed from their
current location and taken to a temporary, secure holding area. Further
assistance in the form of finding a house, temporary employment and payment
of a subsistence payment on average of $60,000 per year (approx Rs.33 lakhs)
is paid out. Further the witness is provided with new identity documents for
him/her and family. Counselling service is also arranged by the agency. Once in
the program, the Marshals Service provides 24-hour protection while they are in
a high-threat area, including pre-trial proceedings and court appearances. Once
adapted into new environments, contact with the government is only required
once per year or on case of emergencies.

They presume new identities once the trial is over. Since the program’s
commencement in 1970 in the US, in 89% of the cases where witnesses were
involved, the State was able to secure a successful conviction.
 SIMILAR CASES

1. Nitish Katara murder case: -

A young business executive, Nitish Katara, was murdered in 2002 by the
brother Vikas Yadav and cousin Vishal Yadav of his lover Bharati Yadav,
daughter of politician and former MP D.P. Yadav. The trial court held that as
the family did not approve their relationship, Nitish's murder was an honour
killing. After a long battle the Supreme Court sentenced both of them to 25
years in prison without remission in 2008. The order has finally provided
closure to the case.
The case resembles to the Jessica lal’s murder case as it stretched for quite a lot
of years, without justice being served. Vikas Yadav was also one the main
convicts in the Jessica lal murder case. The accused being the son of a
prominent political figure had a great impact over the case. Many witnesses
turned hostile in the court of law due to influence of rich and powerful people
just like that in Jessica lal’s case.

2. Tandoor murder case: -

Sushil Sharma, a congress youth leader and MLA was married to Naina Sahani.
Sushil suspected Naina of having an extra-marital affair with her classmate
Matloob Karim. On 2nd July 1995, Sushil found Naina talking over phone to
Matloob and consuming alcohol. Sushil got enraged and shot Naina which
killed her. He took the body to a restaurant called Bagiya, chopped the body
into pieces, and put it into tandoor to burn it with the help of the manager,
Keshav Kumar. Sharma was sentenced to death by trial court in 2003. His
sentence was commuted to life imprisonment by the Supreme Court in 2013.
The case has many similarities with the Jessica lal case including the
involvement of prominent people and political influence on the case. Just like
Jessica lal case many witnesses and even the police officers reported of bribe
offers and death threats in order to change their statements. Constable Kunju
writes, did not just receive death threats but was also offered Rs 10 lakh as bribe
to give a clean chit to Sharma in court.

3. Arushi Talwar murder case: -

On 16th May 2008, a 14-year-old girl Aarushi Talwar was found dead with her
throat slit in her bedroom. A day later their domestic help Hemraj Banjade’s
dead body was found with slit throat on the terrace of the same flat. Police
suspected it to be a case of honour killing and her parents, Rajesh Talwar and
Nupur Talwar, both dentists, came under the scanner. Noida Police alleged that
Rajesh had committed the twin murders after finding Aarushi and Hemraj in an
objectionable position. However, no forensic or material evidence was provided
to substantiate the claim. The case stretched for years and finally on 25 th
November 2013, CBI Judge convicted the Talwars guilty of both the murders
and sentenced them with life imprisonment. But in September 2017 the
Allahabad High Court said that the Talwars are innocent of the murder of their
daughter Aarushi Talwar and domestic help Hemraj.
The murder had no witnesses, yet everyone assumes they know what happened.
Just like the Jessica lal murder case, the media hyped the issue which finally
ended up in a trial by media. Hence, people were so convinced about the guilt of
the parents that they see the trial as a legal formality, which finally leaded to
wrong conviction of the Talwars.

4. Salman Khan Hit and Run case: -

On 28 September 2002, celebrated actor Salman Khan had run his car over a
group of persons who were sleeping in front of a suburban bakery on the
pavement on 28 September 2002. One person was killed, and four others were
injured. Salman had allegedly bumped his Toyota Land Cruiser into American
Express Bakery on Hill Road junction in Bandra under the influence of alcohol.
Ravindra Patil, Salman Khan's police bodyguard stated that Salman was at the
wheel and he was drunk. He further said he had asked the actor not to drink that
night as it is dangerous while driving but Salman did not pay heed to his advice.
He subsequently changed his statement and was declared a hostile witness by
the prosecution.
The case resembles by the Jessica lal murder case as it involves influential
people due to which it stretched for years and witness after witness turned
hostile in the court of law. The Mumbai High Court, in December 2015,
acquitted him of all charges. In its verdict, the court said, "There wasn't enough
evidence to prove actor Salman Khan was inebriated and driving the Toyota
Land Cruiser."
 CONCLUSION

The Jessica Lal case reveals several key aspects of India in its current stage of
development. The first is its media and the way that social, news, and film
media influenced the outcome of the case. Jessica Lal would only be a young
woman who died brutally and tragically if it was not for the publicity her case
underwent. Technology and modern media helped the case by making the
symbol for the nation. The press was able to uncover the truth behind rumours
of bribes and threats against witnesses, and the Internet was used as a platform
to organize the Jessica Lal protests to encourage active participation and
awareness in the society.

The second aspect reveals the long struggle against gender violence and the
continually evolving views of women and their place in Indian society. It
emphasises on the paradoxical position of women in Indian society. They are
given more rights by law, but the same system refuses to protect those rights so
they must work just that much harder to gain in practice what they have on
paper.

The third aspect takes into account the difficult situation the current justice
system finds itself and also shows the progress that India has made to try to
improve its justice system. In most cases involving influential people, it has
been regular practice for witnesses to retract from their original statements or to
go into hiding because of intimidation and threat to life and destruction of
property. The situation gets further aggravated when he realises that there is no
legal obligation by the state for extending any security, if need arises. What
India needs at present is a Witness Protection programme that can guarantee
that witnesses will not be harmed in any way and to ensure that justice and truth
prevails in the largest democracy in the world.

FUTURE SCOPE
The Jessica lal murder case, brought into focus the role of the media. The fight
for justice for Jessica Lal was also significant for being one of the first such
large-scale protests involving the urban upper middle class. The case proclaims
that the society will not sit back while justice is being denied. The case also sets
an example for the media, as when the court is not able to provide justice,
media, being one of the pillars of democracy, can play an important role in
finding the truth and bringing it out to the world.
Another aspect is of the critical need of a Witness Protection System in the
Indian judiciary, as the case involves a lot of key witnesses turning hostile due
to the pressure of influential pressure. India being a developing country must
take note of the success of the Witness Protection Act us USA and so that the
witnesses can come up with the truth without any fear and the criminals can be
convicted and justice can be served in the country without any hindrance.
 BIBLIOGRAPHY

 Primary Resources:
1. IPC Bare Act
2. Sidhartha Vashisht @ Manu Sharma v. State (Nct of Delhi)

 Secondary Resources:
Books: -

1. Criminal Law
By- PSA Pillai
2. Criminology Penology and Victimology
By- Ahmad Siddhque
3. Principles of the Law of Evidence
By- Dr. Avtar Singh
4. Code of Criminal Procedure
By- Ratanlal and Dheerajlal
Law Journals: -

1. Justice of Jessica (Florida State University Libraries)

By- Lisette Alvarez
(https://diginole.lib.fsu.edu/islandora/object/fsu:204451/datastream/PDF/view )

2. Public Outrage and Criminal Justice: Lessons from Jessica Lal case
By- Brendan O’Flaherty and Rajiv Sethi
( http://www.columbia.edu/~rs328/Jessica.pdf )

Websites: -

1. http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/Jessica-Lall-murder-case-Chronology-of-
events/article11193647.ece
2. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murder_of_Jessica_Lal
3. https://www.mapsofindia.com/on-this-day/30-april-1999-jessica-lal-indian-model-
was-killed
4. https://www.ndtv.com/book-excerpts/behind-ndtvs-campaign-for-jessica-lal-by-
sonia-singh-1425893
5. http://www.livemint.com/Politics/jEy0BKK3KYreeDGmtdqe2N/Four-court-
cases-that-shook-Indias-conscience.html
6. http://www.newsanalysisindia.com/post/Jessica-lall-murder-Case-is-similar-to-
Tandoor-Murder-Case.aspx
7. https://www.ndtv.com/topic/jessica-lall-murder
8. https://www.lawctopus.com/academike/media-trials-india/
9. https://www.thenewsminute.com/article/ambition-jealousy-enmity-exhaustive-list-
sensational-murder-cases-india-33912
10. https://thewire.in/70593/nitish-katara-case-judgment/
11. http://indianexpress.com/article/cities/delhi/tandoor-murder-case-cop-got-death-
threats-says-officer-who-led-probe-5080837/
12. http://www.thehoot.org/media-watch/media-practice/implicated-by-the-media-
10336
13. http://www.firstpost.com/entertainment/all-you-need-to-know-about-the-salman-
khan-hit-and-run-case-649898.html
14. https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/entertainment/hindi/bollywood/photo-
features/salman-khan-hit-and-run-case-2002-to-2015/photostory/47184179.cms
15. https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/entertainment/hindi/bollywood/photo-
features/salman-khan-hit-and-run-case-2002-to-2015/salman-khan-hit-and-run-
case-2002-to-2015/photostory/47184173.cms
16. https://www.indiatoday.in/magazine/nation/story/20060403-jessica-lal-murder-
case-judgement-provokes-public-outrage-785741-2006-04-03
17. http://www.columbia.edu/~rs328/Jessica.pdf
18. https://diginole.lib.fsu.edu/islandora/object/fsu:204451/datastream/PDF/view
19. http://www.legalserviceindia.com/article/l259-Witness-Protection-
Programme.html
20. http://www.firstpost.com/india/when-witnesses-go-hostile-from-jessica-lal-to-
varun-gandhi-809851.html
21. http://scholar.law.colorado.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?
article=1684&context=articles
22. https://www.lawctopus.com/academike/witness-protection-problems-faced-and-
need-for-a-protection-programme-in-india/