Know the process :This is how criminals are convicted:

1) Police interrogates suspects. Learns how and why crime is committed. But this is not enough to convict suspects. The statements made to police cannot be admitted in court. (Except statements about recovery of weapons, stolen items etc.)

3) Once police knows how crime is committed, he looks for Eye Witnesses to crime.

4) If there are no eye witnesses, Police looks for witnesses who have seen things happened immediately before crime and things happened after crime.

5) If whatever evidences are collected by Police, inspires "Confidence in Judge that there is no doubt that accused is the person who has committed crime," he will convict him by writing his long opinion in details.

6) His opinion and evidence recorded in his court will be examined in appeal by High Court and Supreme Court Judges. If they too feel sure that accused is the criminal, then conviction stays.

7) For routine type of murder punishment is imprisonment for whole life. If murder is done in such a way that it is "Rarest of rare crime", then death sentence can be given.

8) Lawyers help both ways. If complainant engages them, they try their best to see that accused are convicted in accordance with law. If accused engages them, they try their best to get acquittal according to law, for accused.

9) Their services are necessary because, every sentence of evidence is required to be checked and rechecked  as per principles of laws laid down in books and by superior courts.

Haresh Raichura 25/3/2016

True Story : In Cross Exam No question was asked to Doctor about injuries on dead body. And Result? Acquittal..

True Story : In Cross Exam No question was asked to Doctor about injuries on dead body. And Result? Acquittal !

This is a true story describing that true Art of Cross Examination is about "When not to ask any questions to witness".

A woman had committed suicide. Husband and his parents were arrested for dowry death.

Since suicide was with 7 years of marriage, presumption of dowry death applied. 10 years can be jail.

Trial court had acquitted parents but had sentenced the husband after finding him guilty.

In appeal, High Court acquitted Husband also.

Now the State of Punjab had filed appeal in Supreme Court. I was defending husband.

During hearing of appeal judge pointed out from deposition of doctor that there were four injuries on dead body.

And therefore cruelty immediately before death was proved.

And worse, trial court advocate for accused did not put any question to doctor during cross . He simply refused to cross examine doctor.

Supreme Court Judges asked me, why they should not convict my client husband on 304B and send him to jail for 10 years?

I was non plused . There was no cross of doctor in trial court. This was going against my client.

I sought and adjournment to check records of case. The case was adjourned.

I called upon trial court and asked him why he had refused to cross examine doctor?

He said he had tried this case 20 years ago, and now he did not remember.

I was stuck. I checked all records of case. I read doctor's evidence again and again and tried to guess why trial court advocate could have refused to cross examine doctor about injuries.

Then the answer struck me.

The Doctor had no where stated in his deposition that "Injuries were Ante Mortem". He had never said that these injuries were inflicted on deceased prior to her death.

So this was the reason that trial court advocate may have refused to cross examine doctor.

Had he put any question to Doctor, he may have said that injuries were prior to death.

This one question and answer could have sent husband in jail for 10 years.

But now, on record of case, there remained doubt about whether injuries were prior to death or after death.

Benefit of doubt goes to accused.

I found citations which said that when there is doubt about ante mortem or postmortem of injury, conviction cannot be sustained.

In end result, husband remain acquitted. And I learned a lesson in fine art of "Knowing when Not to ask questions to witnesses."

Haresh Raichura
23/3/2014

Need for Regulator to monitor conducts of accused released on bail

Police and Chief Public Prosecutor are duty bound to report to court if some accused is violating conditions of bail. But that is not being done. In India, criminal law depends too much on people to come forward to complain at take risks to their life in doing so. If criminal is released on bail on some conditions, and if he violates condition, unless someone comes and files application for cancellation of bail, the court is helpless. The complainants are mostly victims who cannot come to complain without increasing risk on them. An independent authority is needed to move such applications.

How to prove a video footage fake?

Know legal aspects of what should be proved before saying that a particular video is fake 1)The person who shot video must state on oath that he shot video 2) Video footage to be sealed and sent to laboratory in sealed cover 3) Laboratory will compare seals before opening sealed cover.  4) Then video to be examined and findings to be recorded 5) The part which is fake and part which looks genuine should be marked distinctly 6) The finding of lab assistant must be signed by Director of lab 7) Sample should be kept in safe custody for producing in court in future if necessary.

Concurrent and Consecutive Punishments

Know when punishments run concurrently and when it runs consecutively. if a criminal beats a victim and then rapes her, the punishment for 3 years for beating and for rape for 10 years will be concurrent. So ultimately criminal will suffer 10 years only. But if he beats victim in the morning and then rapes her in evening, these two crimes will be treated separately. Punishment will be consecutive. He will have to suffer 10 years + 3 years total 13 years.