| Topics |
Headnote |
Judgement |
| CRIMINAL JURISPRUDENCE |
|
PDF |
| CRIMINAL JURISPRUDENCE |
Criminal Jurisprudence — Right of accused — Held, an accused must also be protected against the possibility of false implication. |
PDF |
| CRIMINAL JURISPRUDENCE |
Criminal Jurisprudence — Appellate Court — Obligation of — Held, the appellate court is under an obligation to consider & identify the error in the decision of the trial court — & then to decide whether the error is gross enough to warrant interference. |
PDF |
| CRIMINAL JURISPRUDENCE |
Criminal Jurisprudence — Judgment of the trial Court —Reversal of —Appellate Court — Desecration of — Exercising of— Duty of Court — Held, the decoration is to be exercised very cautiously to correct an error of law or fact —if any & significant enough to warrant reversal of the verdict of the trial court. |
PDF |
| CRIMINAL JURISPRUDENCE |
Criminal Jurisprudence — Guilt of accused — Proving of — Held, suspicion however grave, it cannot take the place of proof — & the prosecution in order to succeed on a criminal charge cannot afford to lodge its case in the realm of “may be true” — but has to essentially elevate it to the grade of “must be true”. |
PDF |
| CRIMINAL JURISPRUDENCE |
Criminal Jurisprudence — Duty of the Court — In a criminal prosecution, the court has a duty to ensure that mere conjectures or suspicion do not take the place of legal proof. |
PDF |
| CRIMINAL JURISPRUDENCE |
Criminal Jurisprudence — Duty of the Court — Reasonable doubt — Held, in a situation where a reasonable doubt is entertained in the backdrop of the evidence available — to prevent miscarriage of justice, benefit of doubt is to be extended to the accused. |
PDF |
| CRIMINAL JURISPRUDENCE |
Criminal Jurisprudence — Presumption of innocence & Burden of proof — there is a preference to wrongful acquittal compared to the risk of wrongful conviction— Such is the abiding jurisprudential concern to eschew even the remotest possibility of unmerited conviction— “The Law of Evidence” fifth edition by Ian Dennis— referred. |
PDF |
| CRIMINAL JURISPRUDENCE |
Criminal Jurisprudence — Primary postulation— Possibility of two views — one pointing to the guilt of the accused and the other to his innocence — Duty of the Court — the view favourable to the accused ought to be adopted. |
PDF |
| CRIMINAL JURISPRUDENCE |
Criminal Jurisprudence — Accepted Principle — Burden of proof — is always on the prosecution — & the accused is presumed to be innocent unless proved guilty— The prosecution has to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt — & the accused is entitled to the benefit of the reasonable doubt. |
PDF |
| CRIMINAL JURISPRUDENCE |
Criminal Jurisprudence — Reasonable doubt — Interpretation of — The reasonable doubt is one which occurs to a prudent and reasonable man. |
PDF |
| CRIMINAL JURISPRUDENCE |
Criminal Jurisprudence — Reasonable doubt — Construction of — The doubt which the law contemplates is not of a confused mind but of prudent man who is assumed to possess the capacity to — “separate the chaff from the grain” — The degree of proof need not reach certainty but must carry a high degree of probability. |
PDF |
| CRIMINAL JURISPRUDENCE |
Criminal Jurisprudence — Principle of natural justice — violation of — Held, as a Court of law one cannot act in violation of the rights of the accused. |
PDF |