The day- to-day hearing in the Delhi gang-rape case began on Saturday in a special fast-track court in Saket.
The court is also likely to issue summons to all the accused to appear before it next week. The case will then be referred to a Sessions court, however, the judge who will try the case has yet to be selected.
Several charges, including that of murder were filed against all the five adult accused in the gang rape case in which a 23-year-old Delhi girl lost her life.
The trial in the case will be in-camera and no public would be allowed during the proceeding.
The accused have been charged under sections 302 (murder), 376 (gangrape), 377 (unnatural offence), 201 (destruction of evidence), 307 (attempt to murder), 365 (kidnapping or abduction with intent to secretly or wrongfully confine a person), 394 (voluntarily causing hurt in committing robbery), 396 (dacoity with murder) and 34 (common intention).
The prosecution during the trial is expected to demand death penalty for the five accused in connection with ghastly incident, which stirred the conscience of the nation.
.Charges of gang-rape, murder, kidnapping, criminal assault and robbery among other sections of IPC have been pressed against the accused.
On Thursday, the Delhi Police filed a 1,000-page chargesheet in the Delhi gang-rape case in the Metropolitan Magistrate's Court in Saket.
Dharmendra Kumar Mishra, a lawyer at Saket Court, had said: "At the end of the today's (Thursday) proceeding the learned duty magistrate had taken the chargesheet on record and adjourned the case for January 05 for consideration. A concerned regular magistrate would conduct the case on that day.”
"Police had filed chargesheet before the concerned today's duty magistrate and the duty magistrate has taken the chargesheet on record. The police also requested the court to keep the identity of the victim secret," added Mishra.
The chargesheet was filed against five of the six accused in the December 16 brutal gang-rape and assault case of the girl, who died in a Singapore hospital on December 29.
The prosecution alleged that the crime was executed in a "well-planned" manner. "We have invoked section 120-B as all the six accused have committed the crime in a well-planned manner," public prosecutor Rajiv Mohan told reporters.
"Each one of them has a specific role in the commission of the offence. So they are equally liable for the crime. We have sufficient evidence against all the accused including the juvenile offender," he said.
Mohan said the DNA report has established the involvement of all the accused in the crime.
The five accused — Ram Singh, his brother Mukesh and their accomplices Pawan Gupta, Vinay Sharma and Akshay Thakur — have been charged for the offences of murder, gang rape, attempt to murder, kidnapping, unnatural offences, dacoity, hurting in committing robbery, destruction of evidence, criminal conspiracy and common intention under the Indian Penal Code.
The case of the sixth accused, a juvenile, will be filed before the Juvenile Justice Board.
In the 33-page chargesheet with annexures running into several hundred pages, was filed before metropolitan magistrate Surya Malik Grover with the prosecution urging the court to keep the document in a sealed cover to protect the identity of the victim and that the proceedings be held in-camera.
The court has posted the matter for hearing on January 5 before the area magistrate who is expected to commit it to sessions for trial.
Sixth accused to be tried in Juvenile Justice Board?
Sources said many state police chiefs openly advocated lowering the age bar to define a juvenile, as in recent years there has been a growing number of cases where people below 18 years were found to be involved in rape cases. Home minister Sushil Kumar Shinde also favours that the age bar to define a juvenile should be 16
The sixth person apprehended in the case has claimed that he is a minor and his case will be tried in Juvenile Justice Board. A separate police report will be sent to the Board after a bone test confirms that he is a minor.
The sequence of events, the treatment, shifting of the patient to a Singapore hospital as well as her death, have all been mentioned along with statements of 30 witnesses in the chargesheet.