LCI Learning

Share on Facebook

Share on Twitter

Share on LinkedIn

Share on Email

Share More

PARTHA P BORBORA (advocate)     22 June 2009

pls advice(only by criminal lawers)

 

in an instance case where I m for the accused who is charged U/S 302 of IPC; the prosecution has examined as many as 6 witnesses including the I/O, M/O and the complainant. Except the Copt- all PW deposed that they saw the victim committed suicide by hanging. The Copt. deposed that the accused killed the victim then hanged her to prove suicide, but he is a hearsay witness. The M/O who conducted the autopsy deposed that he found a complete round ligature mark in the neck of the victim and there is no gap near the knot. I n cross I ask him where her cervical cartilages was intact or not he replied that it was broken. Again I ask him whether a layer by layer examination of the tissue of her neck were examined or not, he said not again I asked him where her there is any sign of struggle or any nail mark near the ligature mark or nor he replied not. At last I ask his opinion – he deposed that the victim was died either as a result of a homicide or as a result of accidental hanging. As there is a complete ligature mark present if I argue that the death was as a result of accident whether it will create a reasonable doubt that my accused gets the benefit of doubt? Pl advice. The case is posted on 17th of June f
in an instance case where I m for the accused who is charged U/S 302 of IPC; the prosecution has examined as many as 6 witnesses including the I/O, M/O and the complainant. Except the Copt- all PW deposed that they saw the victim committed suicide by hanging. The Copt. deposed that the accused killed the victim then hanged her to prove suicide, but he is a hearsay witness. The M/O who conducted the autopsy deposed that he found a complete round ligature mark in the neck of the victim and there is no gap near the knot. I n cross I ask him where her cervical cartilages was intact or not he replied that it was broken. Again I ask him whether a layer by layer examination of the tissue of her neck were examined or not, he said not again I asked him where her there is any sign of struggle or any nail mark near the ligature mark or nor he replied not. At last I ask his opinion – he deposed that the victim was died either as a result of a homicide or as a result of accidental hanging. As there is a complete ligature mark present if I argue that the death was as a result of accident whether it will create a reasonable doubt that my accused gets the benefit of doubt? Pl advice. The case is posted on 17th of June f
in an instance case where I m for the accused who is charged U/S 302 of IPC; the prosecution has examined as many as 6 witnesses including the I/O, M/O and the complainant. Except the Copt- all PW deposed that they saw the victim committed suicide by hanging. The Copt. deposed that the accused killed the victim then hanged her to prove suicide, but he is a hearsay witness. The M/O who conducted the autopsy deposed that he found a complete round ligature mark in the neck of the victim and there is no gap near the knot. I n cross I ask him where her cervical cartilages was intact or not he replied that it was broken. Again I ask him whether a layer by layer examination of the tissue of her neck were examined or not, he said not again I asked him where her there is any sign of struggle or any nail mark near the ligature mark or nor he replied not. At last I ask his opinion – he deposed that the victim was died either as a result of a homicide or as a result of accidental hanging. As there is a complete ligature mark present if I argue that the death was as a result of accident whether it will create a reasonable doubt that my accused gets the benefit of doubt? Pl advice. The case is posted on 17th of June f
in an instance case where I m for the accused who is charged U/S 302 of IPC; the prosecution has examined as many as 6 witnesses including the I/O, M/O and the complainant. Except the Copt- all PW deposed that they saw the victim committed suicide by hanging. The Copt. deposed that the accused killed the victim then hanged her to prove suicide, but he is a hearsay witness. The M/O who conducted the autopsy deposed that he found a complete round ligature mark in the neck of the victim and there is no gap near the knot. I n cross I ask him where her cervical cartilages was intact or not he replied that it was broken. Again I ask him whether a layer by layer examination of the tissue of her neck were examined or not, he said not again I asked him where her there is any sign of struggle or any nail mark near the ligature mark or nor he replied not. At last I ask his opinion – he deposed that the victim was died either as a result of a homicide or as a result of accidental hanging. As there is a complete ligature mark present if I argue that the death was as a result of accident whether it will create a reasonable doubt that my accused gets the benefit of doubt? Pl advice. The case is posted on 17th of June f
in an instance case where I m for the accused who is charged U/S 302 of IPC; the prosecution has examined as many as 6 witnesses including the I/O, M/O and the complainant. Except the Copt- all PW deposed that they saw the victim committed suicide by hanging. The Copt. deposed that the accused killed the victim then hanged her to prove suicide, but he is a hearsay witness. The M/O who conducted the autopsy deposed that he found a complete round ligature mark in the neck of the victim and there is no gap near the knot. I n cross I ask him where her cervical cartilages was intact or not he replied that it was broken. Again I ask him whether a layer by layer examination of the tissue of her neck were examined or not, he said not again I asked him where her there is any sign of struggle or any nail mark near the ligature mark or nor he replied not. At last I ask his opinion – he deposed that the victim was died either as a result of a homicide or as a result of accidental hanging. As there is a complete ligature mark present if I argue that the death was as a result of accident whether it will create a reasonable doubt that my accused gets the benefit of doubt? Pl advice. The case is posted on 17th of June f
in an instance case where I m for the accused who is charged U/S 302 of IPC; the prosecution has examined as many as 6 witnesses including the I/O, M/O and the complainant. Except the Copt- all PW deposed that they saw the victim committed suicide by hanging. The Copt. deposed that the accused killed the victim then hanged her to prove suicide, but he is a hearsay witness. The M/O who conducted the autopsy deposed that he found a complete round ligature mark in the neck of the victim and there is no gap near the knot. I n cross I ask him where her cervical cartilages was intact or not he replied that it was broken. Again I ask him whether a layer by layer examination of the tissue of her neck were examined or not, he said not again I asked him where her there is any sign of struggle or any nail mark near the ligature mark or nor he replied not. At last I ask his opinion – he deposed that the victim was died either as a result of a homicide or as a result of accidental hanging. As there is a complete ligature mark present if I argue that the death was as a result of accident whether it will create a reasonable doubt that my accused gets the benefit of doubt? Pl advice. The case is posted on 17th of June f
in an instance case where I m for the accused who is charged U/S 302 of IPC; the prosecution has examined as many as 6 witnesses including the I/O, M/O and the complainant. Except the Copt- all PW deposed that they saw the victim committed suicide by hanging. The Copt. deposed that the accused killed the victim then hanged her to prove suicide, but he is a hearsay witness. The M/O who conducted the autopsy deposed that he found a complete round ligature mark in the neck of the victim and there is no gap near the knot. I n cross I ask him where her cervical cartilages was intact or not he replied that it was broken. Again I ask him whether a layer by layer examination of the tissue of her neck were examined or not, he said not again I asked him where her there is any sign of struggle or any nail mark near the ligature mark or nor he replied not. At last I ask his opinion – he deposed that the victim was died either as a result of a homicide or as a result of accidental hanging. As there is a complete ligature mark present if I argue that the death was as a result of accident whether it will create a reasonable doubt that my accused gets the benefit of doubt? Pl advice. The case is posted on 17th of June f
in an instance case where I m for the accused who is charged U/S 302 of IPC; the prosecution has examined as many as 6 witnesses including the I/O, M/O and the complainant. Except the Copt- all PW deposed that they saw the victim committed suicide by hanging. The Copt. deposed that the accused killed the victim then hanged her to prove suicide, but he is a hearsay witness. The M/O who conducted the autopsy deposed that he found a complete round ligature mark in the neck of the victim and there is no gap near the knot. I n cross I ask him where her cervical cartilages was intact or not he replied that it was broken. Again I ask him whether a layer by layer examination of the tissue of her neck were examined or not, he said not again I asked him where her there is any sign of struggle or any nail mark near the ligature mark or nor he replied not. At last I ask his opinion – he deposed that the victim was died either as a result of a homicide or as a result of accidental hanging. As there is a complete ligature mark present if I argue that the death was as a result of accident whether it will create a reasonable doubt that my accused gets the benefit of doubt? Pl advice. The case is posted on 17th of June f
in an instance case where I m for the accused who is charged U/S 302 of IPC; the prosecution has examined as many as 6 witnesses including the I/O, M/O and the complainant. Except the Copt- all PW deposed that they saw the victim committed suicide by hanging. The Copt. deposed that the accused killed the victim then hanged her to prove suicide, but he is a hearsay witness. The M/O who conducted the autopsy deposed that he found a complete round ligature mark in the neck of the victim and there is no gap near the knot. I n cross I ask him where her cervical cartilages was intact or not he replied that it was broken. Again I ask him whether a layer by layer examination of the tissue of her neck were examined or not, he said not again I asked him where her there is any sign of struggle or any nail mark near the ligature mark or nor he replied not. At last I ask his opinion – he deposed that the victim was died either as a result of a homicide or as a result of accidental hanging. As there is a complete ligature mark present if I argue that the death was as a result of accident whether it will create a reasonable doubt that my accused gets the benefit of doubt? Pl advice. The case is posted on 17th of June f
in an instance case where I m for the accused who is charged U/S 302 of IPC; the prosecution has examined as many as 6 witnesses including the I/O, M/O and the complainant. Except the Copt- all PW deposed that they saw the victim committed suicide by hanging. The Copt. deposed that the accused killed the victim then hanged her to prove suicide, but he is a hearsay witness. The M/O who conducted the autopsy deposed that he found a complete round ligature mark in the neck of the victim and there is no gap near the knot. I n cross I ask him where her cervical cartilages was intact or not he replied that it was broken. Again I ask him whether a layer by layer examination of the tissue of her neck were examined or not, he said not again I asked him where her there is any sign of struggle or any nail mark near the ligature mark or nor he replied not. At last I ask his opinion – he deposed that the victim was died either as a result of a homicide or as a result of accidental hanging. As there is a complete ligature mark present if I argue that the death was as a result of accident whether it will create a reasonable doubt that my accused gets the benefit of doubt? Pl advice. The case is posted on 17th of June f
in an instance case where I m for the accused who is charged U/S 302 of IPC; the prosecution has examined as many as 6 witnesses including the I/O, M/O and the complainant. Except the Copt- all PW deposed that they saw the victim committed suicide by hanging. The Copt. deposed that the accused killed the victim then hanged her to prove suicide, but he is a hearsay witness. The M/O who conducted the autopsy deposed that he found a complete round ligature mark in the neck of the victim and there is no gap near the knot. I n cross I ask him where her cervical cartilages was intact or not he replied that it was broken. Again I ask him whether a layer by layer examination of the tissue of her neck were examined or not, he said not again I asked him where her there is any sign of struggle or any nail mark near the ligature mark or nor he replied not. At last I ask his opinion – he deposed that the victim was died either as a result of a homicide or as a result of accidental hanging. As there is a complete ligature mark present if I argue that the death was as a result of accident whether it will create a reasonable doubt that my accused gets the benefit of doubt? Pl advice. The case is posted on 17th of June f
in an instance case where I m for the accused who is charged U/S 302 of IPC; the prosecution has examined as many as 6 witnesses including the I/O, M/O and the complainant. Except the Copt- all PW deposed that they saw the victim committed suicide by hanging. The Copt. deposed that the accused killed the victim then hanged her to prove suicide, but he is a hearsay witness. The M/O who conducted the autopsy deposed that he found a complete round ligature mark in the neck of the victim and there is no gap near the knot. I n cross I ask him where her cervical cartilages was intact or not he replied that it was broken. Again I ask him whether a layer by layer examination of the tissue of her neck were examined or not, he said not again I asked him where her there is any sign of struggle or any nail mark near the ligature mark or nor he replied not. At last I ask his opinion – he deposed that the victim was died either as a result of a homicide or as a result of accidental hanging. As there is a complete ligature mark present if I argue that the death was as a result of accident whether it will create a reasonable doubt that my accused gets the benefit of doubt? Pl advice. The case is posted on 17th of June f
in an instance case where I m for the accused who is charged U/S 302 of IPC; the prosecution has examined as many as 6 witnesses including the I/O, M/O and the complainant. Except the Copt- all PW deposed that they saw the victim committed suicide by hanging. The Copt. deposed that the accused killed the victim then hanged her to prove suicide, but he is a hearsay witness. The M/O who conducted the autopsy deposed that he found a complete round ligature mark in the neck of the victim and there is no gap near the knot. I n cross I ask him where her cervical cartilages was intact or not he replied that it was broken. Again I ask him whether a layer by layer examination of the tissue of her neck were examined or not, he said not again I asked him where her there is any sign of struggle or any nail mark near the ligature mark or nor he replied not. At last I ask his opinion – he deposed that the victim was died either as a result of a homicide or as a result of accidental hanging. As there is a complete ligature mark present if I argue that the death was as a result of accident whether it will create a reasonable doubt that my accused gets the benefit of doubt? Pl advice. The case is posted on 17th of June f
in an instance case where I m for the accused who is charged U/S 302 of IPC; the prosecution has examined as many as 6 witnesses including the I/O, M/O and the complainant. Except the Copt- all PW deposed that they saw the victim committed suicide by hanging. The Copt. deposed that the accused killed the victim then hanged her to prove suicide, but he is a hearsay witness. The M/O who conducted the autopsy deposed that he found a complete round ligature mark in the neck of the victim and there is no gap near the knot. I n cross I ask him where her cervical cartilages was intact or not he replied that it was broken. Again I ask him whether a layer by layer examination of the tissue of her neck were examined or not, he said not again I asked him where her there is any sign of struggle or any nail mark near the ligature mark or nor he replied not. At last I ask his opinion – he deposed that the victim was died either as a result of a homicide or as a result of accidental hanging. As there is a complete ligature mark present if I argue that the death was as a result of accident whether it will create a reasonable doubt that my accused gets the benefit of doubt? Pl advice. The case is posted on 17th of June f
in an instance case where I m for the accused who is charged U/S 302 of IPC; the prosecution has examined as many as 6 witnesses including the I/O, M/O and the complainant. Except the Copt- all PW deposed that they saw the victim committed suicide by hanging. The Copt. deposed that the accused killed the victim then hanged her to prove suicide, but he is a hearsay witness. The M/O who conducted the autopsy deposed that he found a complete round ligature mark in the neck of the victim and there is no gap near the knot. I n cross I ask him where her cervical cartilages was intact or not he replied that it was broken. Again I ask him whether a layer by layer examination of the tissue of her neck were examined or not, he said not again I asked him where her there is any sign of struggle or any nail mark near the ligature mark or nor he replied not. At last I ask his opinion – he deposed that the victim was died either as a result of a homicide or as a result of accidental hanging. As there is a complete ligature mark present if I argue that the death was as a result of accident whether it will create a reasonable doubt that my accused gets the benefit of doubt? Pl advice. The case is posted on 17th of June f


Learning

 2 Replies

Dharmesh Manjeshwar (Advocate/Lawyer)     22 June 2009

Sir, Could we know who the Complainant is ? I mean is he related to the victim ..... so that he could be an interested party ..... then the facts and the circumstances too matter a lot which are missing here to advice you properly .... you also say that the Complainant is a hearsay witness ..... without the facts and circumstances of the said case it would be too difficult for us to corroborate on the facts and the evidences ..... you are in the best position to help yourself or we need more fodder to advice .......

Swami Sadashiva Brahmendra Sar (Nil)     23 June 2009

I will search a criminal lawyer for you !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


Leave a reply

Your are not logged in . Please login to post replies

Click here to Login / Register