Leaving my work aside, I would like to first start this discussion to ask you a very important thing.
The lawyer of the four accused in the 16/12 gang rape case said that he does not welcome the decision of hanging his clients. This is alright. But what he said next was horrifying. He said that he would not appeal in the higher court if no such crime takes place in India or Delhi again. and that the Delhi court is under the government pressure Isn't that a stupid and irresponsible statement from a lawyer? Everyone know the four are accused of various crimes and on what basis was the lawyer going to defend and still advocate them? ALL STUPIDITY??

This is a standard format of any lawyer who loses his case.Its waste of time to give a hearing to such comments. Heartening thing is all the four got death.

And I don't think the higher courts will overrule the verdict of the district court. The capital punishment is going to stay.

Every death sentence needs confirmation by High Court. The Delhi police and the Forensic experts have done their job well and successfully prosecuted. It is amply proved that the four convicts had used extreme cruelty in gang rape and killing. Death sentence is appropriate in the circumstances and there is no reason why High Court would not confirm this. This is rarest of rarest case justifying death penalty. However, the convicts have the right to defend themselves through their advocates in High Court.
I also view that the convicts are too poor to get good lawyers. They may not be able to go to supreme Court level.

As regards judicial and criminal law, the chapter appears closed. But we need consider why the relatively poorer sections indulge in such blatant crimes. This is more for sociologists and psychologists to consider.

I too think that the chapter now looks closed, no matter however high profile lawyer fights the case. If this is the rareest of the rare case, then the high court or even the supreme court won't overrule the death penalty.

The reason for people's skepticism is, there were several incidents in the past in which criminals escaped the net.

One in this case too has successfully escaped it because of technical reasons ( juvenile) which really makes your blood boil...He should have been given at least a life sentence !

The defense also tried to establish that in the remaining four there are two young. And with all said and done, its not the end. A beginning only. Defense is going for an appeal to higher courts. The criminals should not have been given a chance to further appeal.

You cannot refuse opportunity for appeal. But it appears that the convicts are too poor to afford competent lawyers.

Yes we cannot refuse lawful procedure but it should be on a faster basis, they should not die a slow death while waiting for ultimate.

It is right, ours judicial procedure will give the convicts the time to think back and repent as it is also necessary as one should remember that we cannot create life, so we cannot destroy it, even in this mortal land, Lord Krishna have to die in order to leave this earth. They should feel the death in each moment till they alive and that would be a perfect satisfaction for her to whom they have treated like anything.

Longer the wait, more the chances of acquittal

We may be rightly angry but histrionics too are a part of the art and craft of people belonging to this profession. I have a sneaking suspicion that this man was loving every inch of publicity for his theatrical conduct. Whether he should have taken up this lost case is basically a question of morality which is outside the realm of legality. For example, thieving to feed a hungry person may be moral but not legal!! As for morality to be practiced by lawyers why don't we say a word about Ram Jethmalani who had made a habit of appearing for all the notorious criminals and politician of dubious characters!!! :whistle: :whistle: :whistle: :whistle: :whistle: :whistle:

We may be rightly angry but histrionics too are a part of the art and craft of people belonging to this profession. I have a sneaking suspicion that this man was loving every inch of publicity for his theatrical conduct. Whether he should have taken up this lost case is basically a question of morality which is outside the realm of legality. For example, thieving to feed a hungry person may be moral but not legal!! As for morality to be practiced by lawyers why don't we say a word about Ram Jethmalani who had made a habit of appearing for all the notorious criminals and politician of dubious characters!!! :whistle: :whistle: :whistle: :whistle: :whistle: :whistle:

We cannot validly oppose any advocate appearing for an accused. In fact, if one cannot get advocate, court provides legal assistance. A case cannot be proceeded unless the accused get reasonable opportunity to defend. But what is astonishing and regrettable is the behavior of defence counsel. Yesterday he was on TV defending his statement that if his sister or daughter indulged in premarital sex or moved with boy friend, he would burn her alive. How the advocate manages his family is his concern.

We may be rightly angry but histrionics too are a part of the art and craft of people belonging to this profession. I have a sneaking suspicion that this man was loving every inch of publicity for his theatrical conduct. Whether he should have taken up this lost case is basically a question of morality which is outside the realm of legality. For example, thieving to feed a hungry person may be moral but not legal!! As for morality to be practiced by lawyers why don't we say a word about Ram Jethmalani who had made a habit of appearing for all the notorious criminals and politician of dubious characters!!! :whistle: :whistle: :whistle: :whistle: :whistle: :whistle:

We cannot validly oppose any advocate appearing for an accused. In fact, if one cannot get advocate, court provides legal assistance. A case cannot be proceeded unless the accused get reasonable opportunity to defend. But what is astonishing and regrettable is the behavior of defence counsel. Yesterday he was on TV defending his statement that if his sister or daughter indulged in premarital sex or moved with boy friend, he would burn her alive. How the advocate manages his family is his concern.

Can he be charged for making such a statement in public? It is a serious issue that demands a prosecution.

He has openly accused the judge of being partial and having compromised on his judgment which is a serious charge and not somethig that should not be taken lightly since it makes ordinary people lose faith in the judiciary system. Other than that talking about killing , even if it is his own daughter is not something that should be taken lightly...

He has openly accused the judge of being partial and having compromised on his judgment which is a serious charge and not somethig that should not be taken lightly since it makes ordinary people lose faith in the judiciary system. Other than that talking about killing , even if it is his own daughter is not something that should be taken lightly...

In such a case, will the judge take any action on his own. That's a technical question and I am not sure how the judge will act. But I don't think the lawyer had any reason to be so hyper. After all, pronouncing the judgement was just a formality.

He has openly accused the judge of being partial and having compromised on his judgment which is a serious charge and not somethig that should not be taken lightly since it makes ordinary people lose faith in the judiciary system. Other than that talking about killing , even if it is his own daughter is not something that should be taken lightly...

In such a case, will the judge take any action on his own. That's a technical question and I am not sure how the judge will act. But I don't think the lawyer had any reason to be so hyper. After all, pronouncing the judgement was just a formality.

The judge could take action on the spot. But he chose to ignore. Now it is too late to take action for contempt of court. The advocate's behavior is being criticized. The Bar council is also thinking of cancelling his licence.

He has openly accused the judge of being partial and having compromised on his judgment which is a serious charge and not somethig that should not be taken lightly since it makes ordinary people lose faith in the judiciary system. Other than that talking about killing , even if it is his own daughter is not something that should be taken lightly...

In such a case, will the judge take any action on his own. That's a technical question and I am not sure how the judge will act. But I don't think the lawyer had any reason to be so hyper. After all, pronouncing the judgement was just a formality.

The judge could take action on the spot. But he chose to ignore. Now it is too late to take action for contempt of court. The advocate's behavior is being criticized. The Bar council is also thinking of cancelling his licence.

Why is it late? There are three months for any party to appeal in a high court. Does‘t the same apply in this case too? I will really like to see what action does the Bar Council take now.