traffic analytics

Justice is where Judges follow Law-KD Aggarwal. Powered by Blogger.

If Judgments were based on law, every lawyer will get same fees!-KD Aggarwal

Facts and Statute are Not Relevant. They are invented / concealed / amended by corrupt Judges - KD Aggarwal.

Let us make India Corruption free

The matter and inference drawn are based on actual personal experiences of Author. They are meant to serve as beacon to those who may find themselves in similar situations to save themselves from clutches of unscrupulous persons. They are also meant to serve as an eye opener to those men who are sitting at Helm of Affairs for improvement of judicial system and corruption free India, so that never again one says; "the law court is not a cathedral (what they used to be) but a casino where so much depends on the throw of the dice (and money). K R Narayanan http://www.krnarayanan.in/html/speeches/others/jan28_00.htm

Transparency improves Accountability

Every Judge is Public Servant and thus accountable for his acts. Transparency of Complaints against Judges and instant stringent action for perjury and violation of their oath will improve Dignity of Courts and Justice delivery.

Friday, February 1, 2019

Judge and their judgements

The following comments made by High Court about CBI court Judge in arushi case would be made again 10 years from now by High Court about CBI Judge who convicted baba Ram Rahim ;
The learned trial Judge has prejudged things in his own fashion, drawn a conclusion by embarking on erroneous analogy conjecturing to the brim on apparent facts telling a different story propelled by vitriolic reasoning (sic),”

“The learned trial Judge took evidence and the circumstances of the case for granted and tried to solve it like a mathematical puzzle when one solves a given question and then takes something for granted in order to solve that puzzle and question (sic),”

“That way, the learned trial judge has aberrated and by dint of fallacious analogy and reasoning has surprisingly assumed fictional animation of the incident as to what actually took place inside and outside the Flat L 32, and in what manner he has tried to give live and colourful description of the incident in question (sic).”

“..like a film director, the trial judge has tried to thrust coherence amongst facts inalienably scattered here and there but not giving any coherence to the idea as to what in fact happened (sic),” the HC judge added.

The High Court order further said possibly the trial judge, “perhaps out of extra zeal and enthusiasm and on the basis of self perception adopted partial and parochial approach in giving vent to his own emotional belief and conviction and thus tried to give concrete shape to his own imagination stripped of just evaluation of evidence and facts of this case”.

“It is apparent that the trial judge was unmindful of the basic tenets of law and its applicability to the given facts and circumstances of the case and failed to properly appraise facts and evaluate evidence and analyze various circumstances of this case (sic),” the court said.