Ryze - Business Networking Get a Coderbuddy developer now

"I Highly Recommend Them" - Magnitude.io CEO; US timezone; affordable rates; Silicon Valley leadership
Get your software built!
Buy Ethereum and Bitcoin
Get started with Cryptocurrency investing
Home Invite Friends Networks Friends classifieds

Apply for Membership

About Ryze

Legal Needs
Previous Topic | Next Topic | Topics
The Legal Needs Network is not currently active and cannot accept new posts
Man convicted and acquitted in the same case almost at the same time!Views: 1716
Dec 12, 2008 10:58 amMan convicted and acquitted in the same case almost at the same time!#


The Times of India
9 Dec 2008

HYDERABAD: Hymad Pasha, the man from Adilabad who was pronounced guilty of killing his wife by one bench and acquitted by another bench in the AP High Court, was actually set free from Cherlapally jail on October 1 this year.

This was two days after the judgment of the second division bench that acquitted him was pronounced on September 29. It can be recalled he was undergoing life imprisonment awarded to him by the sessions judge of Adilabad for harassing his wife and causing her death.

Meanwhile, high court officials are examining the issue to decide on their next course of action to rectify this major legal error. "Chief Justice Anil Ramesh Dave is examining the issue," U Durga Prasada Rao, registrar (judicial) of the high court, told TOI on Monday.

When contacted by TOI, Shanti Neelam, the counsel who was entrusted the case by the HC legal aid wing to argue on behalf of Hymad, said this episode should highlight the need for a foolproof mechanism that would not give rise to such strange developments.

"Think of a situation where some bigwigs who do not want a particular convict to come out file an appeal on his behalf and neglect the case when it is heard and ensure the dismissal of his appeal. This may happen in areas where faction-related killings are taking place. The warlords in such cases may bury the chances of convicts coming out through this method," she said.

In Hymad's case, she said "it was I who argued the case that emanated from his personal appeal and the result is his acquittal." He may not be aware of the appeal that was filed on his behalf by the persons claiming to be his relatives, she said and called for a foolproof mechanism to be adopted.

Private Reply to RVIyengar

Dec 12, 2008 11:01 amMan convicted and acquitted in the same case almost at the same time!#


The Times of India
11 Dec 2008

HYDERABAD: The AP High Court is searching for precedents to get over the embarrassing legal tangle after the Hydmad Pasha case was heard by two benches almost at the same time, giving opposing verdicts.

Sources told TOI that some officials were specifically asked to search if there were any such cases earlier, and to see how authorities could overcome such piquant situations.

Meanwhile, Talari Anantha Babu, former advocate general of the AP High Court, on Wednesday told TOI that there were several Supreme Court verdicts which would come in handy for the AP High Court at this juncture. When asked to suggest a way out of the legal impasse, Anantha Babu quoting those judgments, said it was held unequivocally by the apex court that courts and even the tribunals have got a right to rectify their orders if they realise at a later stage that they were wronged through misrepresentation. This is called the right to recall, he said. Needless to mention, this is available to the AP High Court as well, the former AG said.

Also, some legal sources told this correspondent that the state government, through its public prosecutor, is going to file a petition in the high court seeking it to nullify the second judgment. On a parallel note, it is learnt that the authorities are enquiring into the issue of fixing responsibility on persons responsible for this faux pas.

Private Reply to RVIyengar

Dec 12, 2008 11:02 amMan convicted and acquitted in the same case almost at the same time!#


The Times of India
12 Dec 2008

HYDERABAD: The A P High Court on Thursday appointed senior counsel C Padmanabha Reddy as amicus curae to assist it in solving the legal impasse arising from the two contradictory judgments given by two Benches of the high court in the Hymad Pasha case. In one of the judgments Pasha had been acquitted of the charge of murdering his wife while the other upheld his conviction.

Padmanahba Reddy, a criminal lawyer, was appointed after the state government through its public prosecutor filed a criminal miscellaneous petition in the high court on Thursday praying it to either recall the judgment delivered by the second Division Bench that acquitted the accused or declare its judgment as `non-est' (invalid) as a Division Bench had already decided this case and confirmed the life conviction on Hymad Pasha.

Interestingly, the public prosecutor's petition reveals the fact that both the Division Benches had admitted this case separately by June 2006 itself and the hearing has been going on simultaneously from then. While one Bench delivered its order on March 7, 2008, convicting Hymad, the other Bench delivered its judgment on September 29, 2008, acquitting the same man. Both the Benches were unaware that the case was being heard simultaneously by them.

The public prosecutor in his petition cited three reasons for annulling the second judgment. First, that there is no provision in the Criminal Procedure Code (for the high court) to review or recall its own judgment once it has been delivered on merits after hearing both the parties. Second, that "Once the matter is decided as in this case in an earlier appeal, the court becomes `functus-officio' and therefore, cannot decide again. Thirdly, the PP said that since the first judgment was delivered, the hearing of the second appeal was void, and any judgment delivered by the second Bench was `non-est.'

On these three grounds, the PP submitted that the high court has got inherent power to recall the second judgment or declare it invalid. By the evening, the high court appointed Padmanabha Reddy as amicus curae.

Private Reply to RVIyengar

Dec 14, 2008 2:26 pmre: Man convicted and acquitted in the same case almost at the same time!#

I can understand the reason for two different judgments. The one bench that found him not guilty was full of judges with their own reason to think it is a right of privte defence to "kill a wife." The other bench must have been a set female chauvist swines that believe that the husbands are always guilty.

Private Reply to charuhasan

Dec 16, 2008 4:08 amre: re: Man convicted and acquitted in the same case almost at the same time!#




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

Previous Topic | Next Topic | Topics

Back to Legal Needs

Ryze Admin - Support   |   About Ryze

Ryze Android preview app

Testing Gets Real: blog on A/B testing, building businesses with feedback loops, by Adrian Scott

© Ryze Limited. Ryze is a trademark of Ryze Limited.  Terms of Service, including the Privacy Policy