Legal Service India - You're Lordship: Control Your Emotions
law  in India

You're Lordship: Control Your Emotions

Written by: Vikas Garg - 5th Year, B.A LL.B (Hons.), Institute Of Law, Kurukshetra University
click here for LIVE help-desk
Chat with us  (2 PM - 9 PM IST)
Legal Advice | Find a lawyer | Constitutional law | Judgments | forms | PIL | family law | Cyber Law | Law Forum | Income-Tax | Consumer laws | Company laws
Search On:laws in IndiaLawyers Search

Copyright Online in India
Right from your Desktop - Ph no: 9891244487

Home \ Legal Profession

Latest Articles | Articles 2013 | Articles 2012 | Articles 2011 | Articles 2010 | Articles 2009 | Articles 2008 | Articles 2007 | Articles 2006 | Articles 2000-05

Though I know he is the man who committed the crime, I acquit him, giving him benefit of doubt.

This emotional statement was made by Session Judge, G.P Thareja, while acquitting the accused by giving benefit of doubt to him in Priyadarshini Matto case.
People raised hue and cry over this statement and quoted it as an only case in history, where judge give such kind of statement. But history repeats itself, as P.D Kode, Judge of Special Court for trial of 1993 Mumbai blasts case. Mr. Kode stated: I have concluded that I will give them (some members of the Menon family) the benefit of doubt. It is not a clean acquitted but short of being guilty.

As in this case on 12th September 2006, Mr. Kode, Judge of Special Court, convicted four of the eight members of the Menon family in 1993 Mumbai blasts, while doing so Mr. Kode failed to exercise the restraint, broke out with emotions and came out with new concept of acquittal short of guilty.

It is not favourable for justice to express such kind of expressions. Gentlemen of long robe might know that justice means enforcement of law. It is incumbent on judges to adjudicate in pursuant of law and evidence. Mere hunches, however strong it may be, are no effective substitute of legal proof.

Mr. Kode and Mr.Thareja might be in pursuant of this principle acquitted the accused but they made a mistake of delivering emotions and hunches collaterally with law. Hunches and evidence can't go together. There are only two options in law guilty or not guilty, then from where this new concept of acquittal short of guilty was imported. If cases are to be decided on emotions then what would be need of law and rule of evidence.

No doubt they disposed of cases in pursuant to law but inserted otiose comments. When cases were decided in pursuant of law, then what was the need to make the decision spicy by giving unwanted philosophy.

No person of legal fraternity can deny the fact that it is wrong on part of judges to make such kind of comments. This wrong might be meager in eyes of many but its impact is highly dangerous, because it casts wrong impression on society owing to fact that everybody is not acquainted with gobble-de-gook of law. A person of legal brethren might apprehend their emotions but laymen conceive it as injustice. We have burning instance of Priyadarshini Matto case only how social activists highlighted it as injustice and dishonesty on part of judiciary and took matter into streets with placards depicting the statement of Mr.Thareja. Such demonstrations, with placards depicting the statement of Mr. Thareja, Though I know he is the man who committed the crime, I acquit him, giving him benefit of doubt?, lowered down the confidence and trust of people in Justice and Judicial System as well. For laymen it might also be contradictory decision.

This kind of utterances is also against the judicial principle:

Justice should not only be done, but should also manifestly appear to have been done.

Dr. Justice A R. Lakshmanan Judge, Supreme Court of India opined:

Unnecessary and unwarranted utterances are bound to embarrass not only others, but the Judge himself... (See page no.32 of Lawz, July 2006)
The seat of Judge is seat of god. Besides powers and discretion it holds responsibilities and duties. Judges are also bound by law and they should not impart their emotions and otiose comments. So, it is honorably prayed you're lordship:

Control Your Emotions

The author can be reached at: vikaslegalindia@legalserviceindia.com / Print This Article

Lawyers

Lawyers Search

Find a lawyer
Know your legal options
Information about your legal issues

File Mutual Consent Divorce

Right Away
Call us at Ph no: 9650499965
Copyright Registration Online Right from your Desktop...
*Call us at Ph no: 9891244487

Legal Advice

Get legal advice from Highly qualified lawyers within 48hrs.
with complete solution.

    Your Name                Your E-mail
          

Legal Service India

lawyers in Delhi
lawyers in Chandigarh
lawyers in Allahabad
lawyers in Lucknow
lawyers in Jodhpur
lawyers in Jaipur
lawyers in New Delhi
lawyers in Nashik
Contract laws
Protect your website
Army law
lawyers in Mumbai
lawyers in Pune
lawyers in Nagpur
lawyers in Ahmedabad
lawyers in Surat
Faridabad lawyers
Noida lawyers
lawyers in Dimapur
Trademark Registration in India
Woman issues
Famous Trials
lawyers in Kolkata
lawyers in Janjgir
lawyers in Rajkot
lawyers in Indore
Gurgaon lawyers
Ghaziabad lawyers
lawyers in Guwahati
Protect your website
Law Colleges
Legal Profession
Transfer of Petition
Lawyers in India - Search by City legal Service India
lawyers in Chennai
lawyers in Bangalore
lawyers in Hyderabad
lawyers in Cochin
lawyers in Agra
lawyers in Siliguri
Lawyers in Auckland
Cause Lists
Immigration Law
Medico Legal
lawyers in Dhaka
lawyers in Dubai
lawyers in London
lawyers in New York
lawyers in Toronto
lawyers in Sydney
lawyers in Los Angeles
Wills
Cheque bounce laws
Lok Adalat, legal Aid and PIL

About Us | Privacy | Terms of use | Juvenile Laws | Divorce by mutual consent | Lawyers | Submit article | Lawyers Registration | Sitemap | Contact Us

legal Service India.com is Copyrighted under the Registrar of Copyright Act ( Govt of India) 2000-2015
ISBN No: 978-81-928510-0-6