|
|  |
|
Legal Needs
| [This Network is not currently active and cannot accept new posts] | | Topics |
|
|
| |
| Dec 16, 2008 4:08 am |
|
re: re: Man convicted and acquitted in the same case almost at the same time! |
| RVIyengar
| |
:))
--
HC DECLARES SECOND JUDGEMENT NULL & VOID
The Times of India
16 Dec 2008
HYDERABAD: Perhaps for the first time in its history, the Andhra Pradesh High Court on Monday used its inherent powers and recalled its own second judgment in the now famous Hymad Pasha case and declared its order delivered in this case on September 29, 2008, as `Non-est' and null in the eye of the law.
The division bench of Justice D S R Verma and Justice K C Bhanu, which had delivered the second judgment acquitting Hymad of murder, on Monday ordered the registrar general to conduct an enquiry into the entire episode and report the findings to a disciplinary committee.
TOI had earlier exposed the legal impasse that emanated from the two different judgments delivered by two different division benches of the High Court in the Hymad Pasha Case. The first judgment, given by Justice A Gopala Reddy and B Seshasayana Reddy on March 7, 2008, had convicted Hymad on the charge of murder of his wife. Hymad was released from Cherlapally central jail on October 1 on the basis of the second judgement.
On Monday, Justice Varma and Justice Bhanu heard a petition by the public prosecutor which prayed it to nullify the second judgment. The bench also heard the amicus curiae C Padmanabha Reddy, public prosecutor C Nageshwar Rao, the counsel for the convict, and finally declared the second judgment as null and void in the eye of law.
The bench said: "We did not know that a separate division bench was hearing the matter simultaneously. Though the matter was being heard for the last two years, at no stage was it brought to our notice and it was only through the Parallel Justice item (The Times of India) we came to know of this." The bench also sought to know whether the public prosecutor, who among others have to inform the bench about this, knew this in advance. The PP said he also came to know of the issue only after TOI exposed it.
When the PP tried to criticise TOI for having brought out the issue, the bench brushed his comments aside and said what TOI did was `constructive criticism and in fact is an eye opener'.
Expressing anguish over the way the registry has been functioning in the high court, the bench directed the registrar general to conduct a full-fledged enquiry into the episode and directed that a report be submitted to both the chief justice and the disciplinary committee of the court after fixing the responsibility on the individuals responsible for this unpleasant episode.
Following the setting aside of the second judgment, Hymad Pasha will now have to be brought back to the Charlapally central prison.
Private Reply to RVIyengar (new win) |
|
| |
|
