When the judge mentioned Sherlock Holmes during the hearing of the murder case in the Supreme Court


Highlights:

  • The hearing of the murder case was going on
  • The accused had appealed against the Rajasthan High Court
  • ‘You see, but you don’t pay attention’

New Delhi
The statement of Sherlock Holmes by the Supreme Court (Sherlock Holmes Statement) dismissing the appeal against the conviction of a person in a murder case and a sentence of life imprisonment, stating ‘You see but you do not pay attention’. The top court rejected the contention of the ‘amicus curiae’ that it was not possible for the four eyewitnesses to see the face of the murderer at night.

In its order passed on Monday, a bench of Justices R F Nariman, K M Joseph and B R Gavai said, “We do not find any ground to interfere with the order passed by the High Court.” Accordingly, the special leave petition is dismissed.

‘You see, but you don’t pay attention’
During the hearing, advocate Piyush Kanti Roy, who was appointed ‘amicus curiae’ in the case, submitted that it was a deserted place and dark night and four eyewitnesses in the case could not see the face of the petitioner. To this Justice Nariman said, ‘It is as if Sherlock Holmes said to Dr Watson, ‘You see, but you do not pay attention’.

‘An innocent should not be punished for a crime he has not committed’
Roy said that his only effort is that an innocent should not be punished for a crime he has not committed. To this, the bench told Roy, “You are discussing something which has already been debated. You have done more than the amicus curiae. Everything is clear.’

Appeal was made against the order of Rajasthan High Court
The top court was hearing an appeal filed by Mukesh, who had appealed against the order of the Rajasthan High Court. The trial court had convicted Mukesh and sentenced him to life imprisonment for the murder of Gopal Lal of his village on 18 July 2012. The Rajasthan High Court had dismissed the petition of Mukesh, lodged in Jaipur jail.

Know what was the whole matter?
Mukesh, in his appeal, argued that he was wrongly implicated in the case and no case was made out against him under section 302 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). According to the prosecution, on July 19, 2012, Babulal had lodged a complaint with the police station that his younger brother was coming to his village from Bhanpur at around 10-11 pm on July 18, 2012, when the villagers informed him that Gopal Lal had been arrested by three people. had beaten. Babulal said that when he reached the spot along with the villagers, he saw that his brother had already been stabbed by three men.

.



Source link

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

Hot Topics

Related Articles

You cannot copy content of this page