As a concluding remark on the specter of uncertainty (of defending multiple appeals) which would possibly hover over, and weigh down those acquitted of offences goes, this Court is in agreement with the view of the Punjab and Haryana High Court that all such „victims‟ or „legal heirs‟ appeals would be heard together, and the issue can be resolved by proper docket management. The court is reminded of the view in Pakala Narayana Swamy v. Emperor AIR 1939 PC 47 that "... in truth when the meaning of words is plain, it is not the duty of the Courts to busy themselves with supposed intentions" - and one may add in the context, imagined difficulties.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Dated: 28.05.2015
CRL.A.1415/2012
RAM PHAL .
Versus
STATE & ORS. ..
CORAM:
MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP NANDRAJOG
MS. JUSTICE GITA MITTAL
MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT
Read full judgment here:click here
Print Page
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Dated: 28.05.2015
CRL.A.1415/2012
RAM PHAL .
Versus
STATE & ORS. ..
CORAM:
MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP NANDRAJOG
MS. JUSTICE GITA MITTAL
MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT
Read full judgment here:click here
No comments:
Post a Comment