Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2012 21:02:00
To: am-global@earthlink.net
From: "Baladeva"
Subject: L N Mishra Case
Baba
Namaskar,
Below is a letter related with the trumped up charges against Ananda Marga. It is an interesting read.
Sincerely,
Baladeva
To: am-global@earthlink.net
From: "Baladeva"
Subject: L N Mishra Case
Baba
Namaskar,
Below is a letter related with the trumped up charges against Ananda Marga. It is an interesting read.
Sincerely,
Baladeva
On 07/26/2012 11:59 AM, Acarya
Abhidevananda Avadhuta wrote:
BABA
Namaskar all,
Re: L N Mishra Case
"Justice delayed is justice denied." It is a time-honored and, indeed,
self-evident legal maxim. The L N Mishra case, dragging on now for 37
years, is a glaring example of the unfairness inherent in a highly
protracted trial.
The Indian Supreme Court, pondering the question of precedent, has
asked our lawyer if it is acceptable that the trial court be requested
to conclude the case in three months. I do not know how our lawyer
will respond to that question, but I would say "No, absolutely not!"
Precedent cuts both ways. What precedent is set when the Supreme Court
seeks to force a verdict in a case where a just verdict is no longer
possible on the evidence?
The L N Mishra case has gone beyond the point of absurdity, beyond the
point where any witness could offer credible testimony, beyond the
point where any judge or jury could reach a conclusion beyond
reasonable doubt. It has been 37 years. There must come a time when a
case is thrown out simply because continuing the legal process only
tramples on the civil rights of the accused. In the L N Mishra case,
the only rational action of the Indian Supreme Court is to acquit the
defendants forthwith.
Below is an article that appeared in today's Indian Express newspaper.
The same news was covered in many, perhaps most, other Indian
newspapers.
-- Abhidevananda Avadhuta
______________________________________________________________________
L N Mishra killing: Trial drags for 37 yrs, SC says system failure
Utkarsh Anand : New Delhi, Thu Jul 26 2012, 00:24 hrs
A delay of 37 years in the trial of former railway minister L N
Mishra's killing prompted the Supreme Court on Wednesday to consider
calling for records of criminal appeals pending for more than 10 years
in all the courts of the country in order to ascertain the prime
reasons of delay and mull if "right to speedy trial can be
concretised".
The court, while agreeing that Ranjan Dwivedi, an accused in the 1975
murder case, has "suffered due to the delay in trial", said that the
real question was determining the yardsticks on freeing an accused on
account of a trial that may go on for more than 20-30 years.
Dwivedi has moved the court seeking to get his prosecution quashed due
to the overstretched trial.
"There is no doubt that right to speedy trial is a fundamental right
but the question is how to concretise this right. How can we decide
who was at fault in dragging a case? How do we deal with systemic
delays? Can we order that the prosecution against an accused, who has
suffered trials for more than 20-30 years for whatever reasons, should
stop? There are several issues," said a Bench of justices H L Dattu
and C K Prasad.
Admitting that this was an instance when "system has failed" in
delivering expeditious justice, the Bench said every case would
require weighing the reasons why the case was dragged for years and
who was responsible for it — accused, prosecution or the system.
"We may also want to look at the criminal appeals pending for more
than 10 years across the courts in the country and examine why they
linger. By accepting the analogy of a statement that discharging an
accused would mean acceptance that the system has failed, we will be
drawing up the guidelines and telling the trial courts to decide
matters within a time-frame," said the Bench.
But, in the present case, the Bench said if the proceedings were
quashed, it might amount to sending "wrong signals" and a "smart
accused" could in future resort to delaying tactics. It asked senior
advocate T R Andhyarujina, who argued the case, to answer by Thursday
if it was acceptable that the SC ask the trial court to conclude the
case in three months.
http://tinyurl.com/d2nbcfl
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
BABA
Namaskar all,
Re: L N Mishra Case
"Justice delayed is justice denied." It is a time-honored and, indeed,
self-evident legal maxim. The L N Mishra case, dragging on now for 37
years, is a glaring example of the unfairness inherent in a highly
protracted trial.
The Indian Supreme Court, pondering the question of precedent, has
asked our lawyer if it is acceptable that the trial court be requested
to conclude the case in three months. I do not know how our lawyer
will respond to that question, but I would say "No, absolutely not!"
Precedent cuts both ways. What precedent is set when the Supreme Court
seeks to force a verdict in a case where a just verdict is no longer
possible on the evidence?
The L N Mishra case has gone beyond the point of absurdity, beyond the
point where any witness could offer credible testimony, beyond the
point where any judge or jury could reach a conclusion beyond
reasonable doubt. It has been 37 years. There must come a time when a
case is thrown out simply because continuing the legal process only
tramples on the civil rights of the accused. In the L N Mishra case,
the only rational action of the Indian Supreme Court is to acquit the
defendants forthwith.
Below is an article that appeared in today's Indian Express newspaper.
The same news was covered in many, perhaps most, other Indian
newspapers.
-- Abhidevananda Avadhuta
______________________________________________________________________
L N Mishra killing: Trial drags for 37 yrs, SC says system failure
Utkarsh Anand : New Delhi, Thu Jul 26 2012, 00:24 hrs
A delay of 37 years in the trial of former railway minister L N
Mishra's killing prompted the Supreme Court on Wednesday to consider
calling for records of criminal appeals pending for more than 10 years
in all the courts of the country in order to ascertain the prime
reasons of delay and mull if "right to speedy trial can be
concretised".
The court, while agreeing that Ranjan Dwivedi, an accused in the 1975
murder case, has "suffered due to the delay in trial", said that the
real question was determining the yardsticks on freeing an accused on
account of a trial that may go on for more than 20-30 years.
Dwivedi has moved the court seeking to get his prosecution quashed due
to the overstretched trial.
"There is no doubt that right to speedy trial is a fundamental right
but the question is how to concretise this right. How can we decide
who was at fault in dragging a case? How do we deal with systemic
delays? Can we order that the prosecution against an accused, who has
suffered trials for more than 20-30 years for whatever reasons, should
stop? There are several issues," said a Bench of justices H L Dattu
and C K Prasad.
Admitting that this was an instance when "system has failed" in
delivering expeditious justice, the Bench said every case would
require weighing the reasons why the case was dragged for years and
who was responsible for it — accused, prosecution or the system.
"We may also want to look at the criminal appeals pending for more
than 10 years across the courts in the country and examine why they
linger. By accepting the analogy of a statement that discharging an
accused would mean acceptance that the system has failed, we will be
drawing up the guidelines and telling the trial courts to decide
matters within a time-frame," said the Bench.
But, in the present case, the Bench said if the proceedings were
quashed, it might amount to sending "wrong signals" and a "smart
accused" could in future resort to delaying tactics. It asked senior
advocate T R Andhyarujina, who argued the case, to answer by Thursday
if it was acceptable that the SC ask the trial court to conclude the
case in three months.
http://tinyurl.com/d2nbcfl
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
