Rubt mhc advt court story criminal appeal case very crucial issues involved in the case by Sekar Reporter · April 21, 2020 [4/21, 16:58] Sekarreporter: [4/21, 16:54] Rubt Three: This murder case appeal is from Nagercoil Session’s Court. In the trial court the line of defense taken by the defense lead to conviction instead of an acquittal. Even when the defense failed nail the prosecution the Trial Court should not have been mute spectator for administering justice. It failed to take note of very crucial issues involved in the case which was to the advantage of the appellant and defense failed to capitalize them and did not touch that zone. I was engaged to conduct th appeal. I went through the Accident and Post Mortem Reports and found that the Dying Declaration was all a big farce. It was opposite to the Accident and Post Mortem Reports. In the appeal the ground that I took was when the appellant had stabbed the decease on the right side of his neck near the throat and the knife having pierced the vocal cord and punctured the upper part of the lung and collapsed it the deceased could not have given the Dying Declaration for two reasons (i) when the vocal cord of the deceased was he had lost his speech (ii) when the upper part of the lung of the deceased was punctured collapsed and pulse rate has fallen down to the level of 5 he was at final stage of death and for those two reasons it is humanly impossible for the decease to give a detailed description of the entire episode of attack on him. I got him bail but before the final disposal could take place the appellant wanted to engage his known Advocate who had shifted his practice in Madras High Court and the brief was handed over to him. I am confident that the case should have ended in an acquittal.[4/21, 16:58] Sekarreporter: 🌹[4/21, 16:58] Sekarreporter: Super
High Court direction to Puducherry governmentwas brought to the notice of the court that the Law Officers of High Court of Madras and its Bench at Madurai (Appointment) Rules of 2017 were framed by the State government following a writ petition filed by advocate V. Vasanthakumar in 2016.judge v Parthiban July 7, 2020 by Sekar Reporter · Published July 7, 2020
layout case orderMR.JUSTICE N.KIRUBAKARAN and THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.VELMURUGAN W.A.Nos.340 & 360 of 2019 and C.M.P.Nos.3358, 3359 & 3532 of 2019 W.A.No.340 of 2019 May 24, 2021 by Sekar Reporter · Published May 24, 2021
சிங்காரவேலன் மூத்த வழக்கறிஞர் Cr.PC யின் பிரிவு 482:- சிவில் தகராறுகளில் உயர் நீதிமன்ற குற்றத்தின் உள்ளார்ந்த அதிகாரம் June 5, 2023 by Sekar Reporter · Published June 5, 2023