A Delhi court on Thursday deferred to November 7 the hearing on the quantum of sentence for the five men convicted for killing TV journalist Soumya Vishwanathan in 2008 on grounds that the pre-sentence report and other documents were yet to be filed.

On October 18, Additional Sessions Judge (ASJ) Ravindra Kumar Pandey had convicted Ravi Kapoor, Amit Shukla, Baljeet Malik, and Ajay Kumar under IPC section 302 (murder) and provisions of the Maharashtra Control of Organised Crime Act (MCOCA) and listed the case for hearing arguments on the quantum of sentence on Thursday.

Taking note of the fact that certain documents, including the pre-sentence report of the probationary officer, had to be filed mandatorily if the maximum sentence in the case is death penalty, the court adjourned the hearing to November 7.

Vishwanathan, who was working with a leading English news channel, was shot dead in the early hours of September 30, 2008, on south Delhi’s Nelson Mandela Marg while she was returning home from work. Police claimed the motive was robbery.

“List the matter for consideration of the report of the probation officer, consideration on the affidavits of the convicts, affidavit on behalf of the state and report from Delhi State Legal Services Authority (DSLA)... And for arguments on quantum of sentence on November 7 at 2 PM,” ASJ Pandey said.

He said though the Delhi State Legal Services Authority (DSLA) had filed the victim impact report, the convicts had not filed their affidavits. Counsels for the convicts jointly submitted that they were unable to prepare the affidavits as they did not have the details and necessary direction could be issued to the jail superintendent and legal aid counsel, available with prison authorities, to assist the convicts in preparation of the affidavits.

The court said according to the guidelines of the Delhi High Court, in a case where there is a conviction for an offence punishable with the death penalty (as one of the alternate punishments), a pre-sentence report had to be obtained from the probation officer before the hearing on the quantum of sentence.

“Accordingly, the principal secretary, home department, Delhi government is hereby directed to assign to any probation officer the task of submitting the pre- sentencing report,” the court said.

It said the report had to specifically include the twin aspects of whether the convicts could commit further crimes and thus remain a “continuing threat to society” and whether there was any probability of the convicts being reformed and rehabilitated.

While detailing the inquiry procedure to be followed by the probation officer, the court said in the light of the fundamental right against self-incrimination, the convicts must be informed of their rights to be silent and in no circumstance can any adverse inference be drawn if the convicts refuse to give an interview to the probation officer.