Don't you think that media in Jessica Lall case has forced court to give a prejudiced decision?

Don't you think that media in Jessica Lall case has forced court to give a prejudiced decision?

In the famous Jessica Lall murder case, since the movie is also coming based on this case, "No One Killed Jessica" I would like to ask few questions especially from women because they have emotional attachment with Jessica since she was also a woman.


My questions are:

1.) Was this not Jessica Lall's own fault that she was being rude to a customer who has come to the bar, though he may be wrong to ask drink at the wrong time (If the story is true)? 

Customer comes to give his patronage and it is because of him that those bar tenders get their salary when they come and buy drinks so you cannot be disrespectful to him. Infront of her subordinates she acted like a afsar (officer) and criticize and accuse them by making baseless allegations but infront of the customers she acted like a 'Kaam Waali Baai' and showed unionism like for e.g. not serving drinks after certain time even if paid more in the incident even if she was treated reasonably.

She was being rude to a customer if the story is true by challenging that even if you give Rs. 1000/- as a tip then I would not serve you drinks after it is closed.

Were there not other ways to handle the customer if he was being rude like asking his companions to take him away etc. or requesting the bar owners to gently distract his attention by telling him that the drink is available somewhere outside where we can take you etc. like they do to small kids when they obstinate about something then we assure them that they can get it sometime later or so or from somewhere else without being rude to them?

2.) The media played a very bad role in giving extra coverage to this event. There are many other issues like poor customer service, scams, taxes being misused etc. and other people being shot dead who never get so much coverage in the media.
They also acted as if they were the witnesses of the murder and it is because of them that the court passed a prejudiced decision. What opinion do you have about this?

3.) Holding someone guilty just on the bases of circumstantial evidence is more wrong. It is a blot to the judiciary system of the country. Maybe Manu Sharma is really committed that murder but tomorrow this might create a precedent and suspects may be held guilty just on the bases of circumstantial evidence even though they may be innocent in real terms. Don't you think that the court has given a prejudiced decision and this is something that makes the judiciary system impure?

4.) A movie also came based on this incident which is even more wrong and a mockery of democracy by further putting baseless allegations on Manu Sharma which is called "No One Killed Jessica". Do you think that this is correct?

5.) She could not stick just to kitchen and try to be competitive by working in top positions than men but when it comes to serving customers like this in the bar then she acted like a Kaam waali baai and refuse to work for extra hours even if you were offered Rs. 1000/- as a tip. If she was so unwilling and have problems working, then why did she work just to show that she was smarter than men?

Sanjeev Nanda's arrogance in 1999 Delhi's hit and run case

A big industrialist, Suresh Nanda’s son and Naval officer SM Nanda’s grandson Sanjeev Nanda allegedly got drunk in a party in Gurgaon. He was just 21 years old and there were rumors that his family were planning his marriage with a 18-year-old girl named Aditi. After the party got over in Gurgaon Sanjeev and his friends decided to return to their homes.

Sanjeev was instructed not to drive but was behind the wheel anyways. In the early morning at 4 am of 10^th January, 1999 while returning from Gurgaon where he attended a party and got drunk, Sanjeev’s BMW car allegedly ran over 6 people including 3 policemen who were in duty by placing a barricade on the road to check vehicles in Lodhi Road in Delhi. Four people were killed on the spot and two people died later in the hospital. The seventh victim somehow survived.  During investigation, it was calculated by experts by checking the damage and injury that the car was driven approximately at a speed of 140 Km/hour .

Later, Sanjeev allegedly stopped the car after the accident and going ahead to some distance to check the damage and saw people under his car. One of his friends, according to the prosecution called him by his nickname, Sanz, and asked him to go. Sanjeev, upon reaching his father’s bungalow in Golf Links where I used to stay nearby in Pandara Park in 1999, asked his domestic helpers, watchman and driver to clean the car.

During preliminary investigations, the police found the car’s broken number plate after tracing the oil leak trail from the car. It was also found that the car was registered in the accused Sanjeev Nanda’s sister’s name Sonali Nanda. It was a one-month old BMW car with a foreign number plate and it was not registered in India.  They also found another witness who was going to railway station at that time saying that the car was driven beyond the speed limit. His medical examination also proved that he had consumed alcohol.

The trial of this case initially proved to be weak. The victim who survived the accident retracted from his earlier statement and presented a new story that the vehicle causing the damage was a vegetable tempo. Many people, including the media also gave this case less attention than any other case just because it was an accident and not murder. However, this doesn’t seem to be a pretext for me to avoid it just because it was an accident. Sanjeev was old enough to understand that driving in an intoxicated situation will cause damage or even death. Atleast it should be noticed that he accidentally killed not one but six people unlike murder. Though it was medically proven that he had consumed alcohol, he just confessed that he had beer that night and finally went on saying that the car was registered on his sister’s  Sonali Nanda’s name so he had nothing to do with the accident.  

However, in 2008, he was convicted but only for 2 years when it went for a re-trial in a fast track court. His sentence was also reduced after charging Rs. 50 lakh fine on him which was not difficult to pay for this spoilt rich brat.

On the contrary, the society accepted him as he was. Rumors were there that he dated Bollywood actress Shamita Shetty.

What improvements can be suggested for this high profile case where judiciary failed to play role on its part?

Firstly, it should be noted that the party in Gurgaon should have been held after getting permission from local government authorities. The local government should have verified that is there any alcohol being served in the party and if it is then what precautions were taken for those who consumed it by putting barricade outside the location.

Secondly, if the vehicle was driven at high speed then any PCR van or constable should have sent a wireless message informing about the vehicle and the immediate next group of cops should have stopped the vehicle by placing spike strips and not barricade because car can be easily driven through the barricade forcibly. However, if spike strips are placed, a car cannot be driven as tyres will be deflated.

Thirdly, CCTV should be installed on the roads, though in 1999 there were little or almost none CCTVs on roads.