Congratulations to M. Shanwar Khan, Delhi Advocate, and all the Best.

A GOOD QUESTION WHICH DESERVES TO BE DELIBERATED UPON BY ALL EXPERTS/CITIZENS TO CONSIDER AS TO WHETHER IT IS NOT HIGH TIME TO BRING ABOUT REVOLUTIONARY CHANGES IN OUR CRIMINAL LAWS TO FORTHWITH DISCONTINUE  SUCH LEGAL AID TO THE CULPRITS RESPONSIBLE FOR SUCH HIGHLY CONDEMNABLE HEINOUS CRIMES IN OUR COURTRY .   LET US PONDER OVER THIS ISSUE SERIOUSLY.

every accused has right to defend.

it is lawer's legal duty uder Advocates Act and rules of Bar council, to not to refuse legal asistance to a litigant unless he himself is a witness,----,----,----.nature or seriosness of crime is not an exeption so as to refuse to provide legal help to an accused.

Hi All,

Yes, everybody has the right to defend his case under the Law. We should to know the conditions which makes a person accused.

Regards

Arvind Singh

Lawyers community at Mumbai might have shocked by the inhuman acts of the terrorists and they took an immature decision not to defend the accused. Here we are dealing not with a terrorist but an accused in a criminal case. The lawyer should not IDENTIFY HIMSELF WITH THE ACCUSED. He must identify himself with the law he deals. So all accused in this gratest democracy keeping a high density profile in judiciary must give legal aid. That is the duty of Indial Judicial System.

Dear Esteem Members,

                                        In this episode I am reminded of the famous trial of a negro murderer, who was defended by a famous American Criminal Lawyer Mr.Stanley, of Kansas. Mr.Stanley, defended a negro murderer, and after his sentence wrote to the governor a strong endorsement of the negro's application for pardon. Now, as Governor Stanley of Kansas, he has had to pass upon a new application for his old client's pardon, and his own letter written as a lawyer, has been laid before him.But he refuses to grant the pardon, and says as a Governor it is right and duty is to view the matter "in entirely different light. ( Reported in 35 American Law Review, page 558)

This raises the very interesting thought by no means new question.The rest has been laid by my learned friend Sureshji.

“Is there no relief? Must we wait for a new generation slowly to bring a radical change of thought and custom? Will the institution of a State defender ( to oppose the State Prosecutor) furnish a speedier solution? These are troublesome questions which must be answered before long.

Go ahead Mr. Khan, we are with you, not because Kasab, is innocent, but because he is an accused.

Dear mr. assumi ! you have referred mr.  governor stanley deciding and rejecting his own application that was moved by him when he was a lawyer.

here i refer a judge namely "cambro" of malta island of 18th century. he was only judge in the island. he was seeing from his window that a man was hotly chased by another and seeing a constable at distance the assailant leaving the knife in the wound ran away. soonafter, a baker who was passing by, saw the victim and tried to remove the knife. when he saw the constable, he got frightened and quickly stood up taking the blood stained knife and kept it in his bosket and concealed himself behind a house. when the constable came to the spot and saw the body of deseased, he guessed that murderer must be hiding himself at any nearby place and he promptly discovered the baker. all this was hapening before eyes of judge. after trial of the case, the judge brushed aside his personal knowledge that the baker was innocent and convicted him and awarded death sentence on the basis of strong circumstantial evidence.  he applied law as if he had not seen the occurrence and in similar circumstances he would convict anyone. the sentence was exicuted. after knowing the reality the public demanded blood of judge but the  jurists appreciated his conduct as he had done justice according to law.

Dear Dr.Tripathi, I have read case of that Judge from Malta, Italy case, and I am of the opinion that the Judge was not proper.

mr.tripathi even i am of the opinion that the judge was not proper as a judge's duty is to give justice ................well in my opinion law is made for maintaining the law and order and punishing the anti-socials ......if the law will keep on favoring the criminals inspite on knowing everything then it will be the common innocent man who will suffer inspite of the fact that the law is made only for such common people so that they can live freely in this society without any danger or apprenhension of danger to their lives.