Upgrad
LCI Learning

Share on Facebook

Share on Twitter

Share on LinkedIn

Share on Email

Share More

Queries Participated

joe   10 July 2011 at 18:47

Burden of Proof

While noting that child abuse is a horrendous crime, my queries are of academic interest.

The Goa Children's Act 2005 s 32(l) places the burden of proof on the accused. 'He' has to prove that he did not commit the crime.

The queries: (a)In the absence of DNA, trace element and video other evidence, How does the accused prove that he did not commit the crime? (b) Will this conviction not be considered 'unsafe' on appeal, IF there is NO supportive material evidence?

It is my view (as a person who deals with such cases) that a law which requires the accused to prove his innocence will eventually hamper the efforts to deal with the perpetrators of child abuse and land a few innocent persons behind bars



joe   24 March 2011 at 00:41

Would it really be 'Contempt of Court'

Dear all,

I found the following on a Newspaper site. I do not agree with this Advocate. How do you feel?

Contempt of court! by Adv Govind Usno Bhobe, Panjim

http://www.oheraldo.in/newscategory/Letters/13

In a landmark judgment reported in ‘AIR 2001 Bombay 60’, the Bombay High Court held that any amendment sought by a passport holder for making corrections regarding date of birth, the Passport Authority is competent to do this. Such matters need not be referred to a Judicial Magistrate; they are overburdened and are not conferred with such jurisdiction under law. The judgment also gave standing directions to the Passport Authority to hold an enquiry and effect necessary changes in respect of change of date of birth or place of birth.

However, whenever an application is made to change wrongly recorded date of birth or place of birth, the office of the Passport Authority, Panjim, directs the aggrieved applicant to get a ‘court order’. This shows scant regard for the High Court’s order.

I wrote several Registered AD letters to the Passport Officer, Panjim, to bring to his notice this High Court order, enclosing copies of the order. Notwithstanding, the Passport Authority has not mended its way. Is this not contempt of court? Bureaucrats should not ignore the cardinal principle that service to mankind is their motto.