Probably they did not want to show you their smiles that the judiciary has no law against the and they will be set free soon, maybe a ban of few years but money is already in their pockets. I have seen many episodes before.
When Sreeshant, Ajit Chandila and Ankeet Chavan were arrested, they had been brought as normal criminals with their faces covered. I didn't understand why. After all, their entire porfiles and lots of photos are all over the cricketing sites. It's not that their facial identity is unknown.........
When Sreeshant, Ajit Chandila and Ankeet Chavan were arrested, they had been brought as normal criminals with their faces covered. I didn't understand why. After all, their entire porfiles and lots of photos are all over the cricketing sites. It's not that their facial identity is unknown.........
because they could not face public so they covered their face.
I think that was just a formality by these three players to show the world that they are really ashamed of their doings.
But I don't think they wore it on their own. There might have certainly been guidelines from the police officials to take them in that way.
I think that was just a formality by these three players to show the world that they are really ashamed of their doings.
But I don't think they wore it on their own. There might have certainly been guidelines from the police officials to take them in that way.
This is correct. Covering faces of accused is police procedure.
I think that was just a formality by these three players to show the world that they are really ashamed of their doings.
But I don't think they wore it on their own. There might have certainly been guidelines from the police officials to take them in that way.
This is correct. Covering faces of accused is police procedure.
But in that case, I don't see any reason why their faces should be covered. Was Sanjay Dutt's face covered when he had comparatively been involved in more serious crimes?
Actually this procedure is to protect the identity because law says 'one is innocent unless proved otherwise, so they do it to keep their identity undisclosed.
But practically speaking, in this case, whose identity are they trying to close anyways?
Actually this procedure is to protect the identity because law says 'one is innocent unless proved otherwise, so they do it to keep their identity undisclosed.
Actually this procedure is to protect the identity because law says 'one is innocent unless proved otherwise, so they do it to keep their identity undisclosed.
If so, not covering face of Sanjay Dutt is well explained. Sanjay Dutt is not an accused but a convict and hence his identity need not be hidden. On the other hand, the Cricket players are being investigated and they are not yet convicts. so their face needs be covered.
Actually this procedure is to protect the identity because law says 'one is innocent unless proved otherwise, so they do it to keep their identity undisclosed.
If so, not covering face of Sanjay Dutt is well explained. Sanjay Dutt is not an accused but a convict and hence his identity need not be hidden. On the other hand, the Cricket players are being investigated and they are not yet convicts. so their face needs be covered.
That's true, once convicted the faces are not covered because the stage of identity parade is over by then.
Actually this procedure is to protect the identity because law says 'one is innocent unless proved otherwise, so they do it to keep their identity undisclosed.
If so, not covering face of Sanjay Dutt is well explained. Sanjay Dutt is not an accused but a convict and hence his identity need not be hidden. On the other hand, the Cricket players are being investigated and they are not yet convicts. so their face needs be covered.
That's true, once convicted the faces are not covered because the stage of identity parade is over by then.
That may be true what you said. But don't you think in this case it was just a formality, as if no one knew their faces......or who they were....... :woohoo: :woohoo:
Actually this procedure is to protect the identity because law says 'one is innocent unless proved otherwise, so they do it to keep their identity undisclosed.
If so, not covering face of Sanjay Dutt is well explained. Sanjay Dutt is not an accused but a convict and hence his identity need not be hidden. On the other hand, the Cricket players are being investigated and they are not yet convicts. so their face needs be covered.
That's true, once convicted the faces are not covered because the stage of identity parade is over by then.
That may be true what you said. But don't you think in this case it was just a formality, as if no one knew their faces......or who they were....... :woohoo: :woohoo:
Probably a case of false shame and outraged dignity!!! :evil: :laugh:
@abhi_bangal