|
|
|
General Forum: Current 'Affairs' | | Kanchi Shankaracharya VS Mohammed Naseeruddin | |
| Inta chesi akkada BJP & VHP chesi chachchindi emi ledu Statements ivvadam tappa ... Remember the noise muslims made when naseeruddin was arrested? Thats what one calls unity!
Mana vaallaki okalla meeda okallu burada zallukovadame saripotundi kada!!!!! Eppudu buddhostundo emo!!!
Posted by: Malakpet Rowdy At: 16, Dec 2004 10:14:26 AM IST
enni Adaaraalu techhinaa te^vakapo^yinaa oka mataadhipatimi^da buradaite^ challe^Saaru migilinavanni che^tulu kaalipo^yinaaka AkulupaTTukone^ prayatname^
BJP kanchi swaamulaneppuDaite^ hindu^mataprachaaraaniki venukesukochhindo^ appuDe^ atanivenuka migilina raajaki^ya paarTi^lanni^ go^tulu travvaDam modalupeTTaayi bhaarata de^Samlo^ raajaki^yanaayakulaku mi^Diyaani me^ne^j che^si tappuDu saaksyaalu puTTinchaTam vennato^peTTina vidya
Posted by: Mr. Bhaskar At: 16, Dec 2004 9:35:51 AM IST
Posted by: Malakpet Rowdy At: 16, Dec 2004 3:46:35 AM IST
Really. The character assassination even before the crime is established is very bad. I agree with you malak and you have given lot of legal points not known to common public like me.
Posted by: Mr. HAYAGREEVA MURTY Rachuri At: 16, Dec 2004 9:14:25 AM IST
If you consider Hindu/BBC 's writings is more effective than Andhra Jyothi's ... Ok. :) No comments on that. :)))
____________________________________________T
This is a classic case where two papers wrote two different things .. then How can one interpret the court proceedings correctly?
And how can one decide about what exactly the Judge had said when ONE HASNT HEARD WHAT HAD BEEN SAID IN THE COURT?
Posted by: Malakpet Rowdy At: 16, Dec 2004 5:51:16 AM IST
Correct me if I am wrong but this is what I perceive the legal proces to be ...
1. If somebody files an FIR on the accused, the accused can initially be arrested after the formalities and be kept in remand for a limited time ..
2. Then he must be presented inside the court, the court would have a quick look at the prima facie evidences and will decide whether the case is strong enough to keep the accused in further custody.
3. If the court feels that the Evidences are weak then it would grant bail to the accused, if the accused applies for bail and may subsequently get the accused aquitted.
4. If the court feels that the Evidences are strong, then it may order the law Enforcement authorities to start trail against the accused and then the grilling of Each and every evidence starts and if those evidences are not found genuine then the accused will be set free, or else punished ..
right now the Seer's case is at stage 3 and stage 4 is the lengthiest process .. with all evidences being examined and cross examined ..
Do you really think all the 81 evidences were examined and cross examined? it takes Years!!!
Posted by: Malakpet Rowdy At: 16, Dec 2004 5:47:45 AM IST
But, I beleive why couldn't court deliver the sentence is , He is still facing other issues also
__________________________________________
leadandi .. I guess u got it wrong .. the argument on December 8 was only about his Bail plea .. and even if Sankaracharya is guilty it will take not less than 5-6 years to prove it and the final verdict will be given only after that.. If court cases can be settled within months, then India wouldhave been a different country lolz
Posted by: Malakpet Rowdy At: 16, Dec 2004 5:36:11 AM IST
EE Godavanta enduku gaani .. if u have a link to the proceedings of Madras high court .. daanini ikkada post cheyyandi ..
so that My Interpreation from the BBC / Hindu site and Your Interpretation from andhrajyothi site would be matched against one another
Posted by: Malakpet Rowdy At: 16, Dec 2004 5:32:58 AM IST
Well if you are talking about the judgement on Dec 8, rejecting the bail plea .. the Jduge said that there were REASONABLE GROUNDS FOR HIM TO BE INVOLVED IN A CRIME THAT FITS LIFE / DEATH SENTENCE ..
He was saying that the Crime deserved Death sentence .. it doesnt mean that the Evidence is sufficient to give him a death sentence ..
If that was really the case, why has court not Delivered the sentence? As far as I understand all the Evidence that was referred to, was related only to teh Bail plea .. not the Crime Trial
What the judge meant to say was that .. since the Crime is serious in nature and there are some reasoable grounds, the Seer can not be granted Bail under section 439, as requested by Seer's lawyer
Posted by: Malakpet Rowdy At: 16, Dec 2004 5:29:48 AM IST
Do you have link to the published proceedings of the court? Could u pass it on if u have? I've been trying for it
Posted by: Malakpet Rowdy At: 16, Dec 2004 5:18:35 AM IST
Prameyam Undi ani niroopinche Aadhaaram ante Prima Facie evidence that is sufficient to try somebody ..
If u dont have that Evidence, you cant even keep the accused under the custody .. so what I feel court meant was that .. there was sufficent evidence to continue the trial on him .. it never talked about Seer being guilty or not .. it was only talking about the prima facie stuff
May be a law graduate, if anyone around, would make it clear
Posted by: Malakpet Rowdy At: 16, Dec 2004 5:15:10 AM IST
| |
|
|
|
| Advertisements |
|
|
|
|
| Advertisements |
|
