But, I think, here we are talking about other delays.
One is the delaying of justice to facilitate burial of evidence and
justice; and the other is the burying of evidence and justice in the
process of hurrying up - both are the banes of justice delivery system and
frustrates the very purpose of the existence of the system.
It has become a practice among litigants to approach the Higher Courts
under various pretexts while the matter is in the advanced or final stages
in the Trial Court to divert the course and prolong the pronouncement of
judgement. In the matter of the *Uber Cabbie r*ape case, the counsel for
the accused wanted to re-examine the witness when the matter was
progressing towards pronouncement of judgement. He approached both the
Honâble High Court and the Supreme Court which turned down his plea. The
counsel was changed midstream and the new counsel bought time to study the
case. Yet, his arguments in the trial court seem to be proceeding on the
same or similar grounds now.
The appellate courts normally do not interfere with the finding of facts
given by trial courts, unless some reason based on facts is traceable on
record. In heinous crimes, it should be made stricter and frivolous pleas
should not be even entertained.
On Tue, Oct 6, 2015 at 6:59 PM, M S APPALA REDDY MADDI <