You did not ask me any question that I could reply to. All you have been doing is mindlessly writing things without first reading and understanding my reply.
I stick to my statement that practice of law is not to merely read books and copy-paste from a judgment of the SC/HC. It requires years of great synergy between theory and practice of law. You may in this regard read a book 'Law and the Lawyers' by Mahatma Gandhi. No legal book can tell you how to cross examine. It is something you learn with time and this art is known only to a practicing lawyer. If it were not so you would not have begged with the lawyers on this forum to help you carve out the questions you need to ask your wife in cross examination, on the link below.
I repeat even at the cost of annoying/demoralising everyone what I said in one of my very first replies on this thread - A lawyer who is a good cross examiner can disprove the very existence of the place of occurence of crime. Once that happens no SC authority is required to be cited. This is the real meaning of practice of law and the marked difference between a practicing lawyer and a theoretical lawyer.
Therefore, it is no wrong to say that law indeed is known only to lawyers and not to people like you. It would be worthwhile for me to infrom you that before a bill is presented in the Parliament/State Legislature it is drafted by the legal experts of the government in the office of Attorney General/Advocate General. The elected representatives merely pass it. The writing is on the wall for you, hope you read and understand it.
No more replies by me on this thread
