prabhakar singh's Expert Profile

Queries Replied : 21832

+ View Full Profile

What kinds of questions I can and can't answer?

My area of expertise

My experience in the area (years):

Organizations I belong to:

Publications or writing which has appeared :

Educational credentials:

Award & Honors:

Gaurav Tripathi says : Criminal LAw
Moot Court Problem for Sushila Devi Memorial Moot Court-2011 (For Screening Round) Village Palam Kheda, 15 Km. from Distt. Lakhipur in the State of Mahakhand. There lives a poor family of farmer Umakant aged 29, with his wife Radhika aged 24 years. Along with Umakant, his father Deoraj aged 56 years, Mother Kala Devi aged 53 years, brother Girdhari aged 25 years are also living in the same house and do farming for their livelihood. On 20th August, 2010 Umakant lodged a report at Lakhipur Police Station that his wife Radhika has dis appeared from his house at about 1:00 P.M. on 19th August, 2010 and on that day at 4:00 P.M. when his mother Kaladevi went to the well behind the house for fetching water, she saw the dead body of Radhika was floating on the water of the well. It was also stated in the information that the deceased Radhika was suffering from insanity for last few days. The case was taken of for investigation by S.H.O. of Lakhipur Police Station.” Subsequntly on 23rd August 2010 another information report was lodged by Shyam Sunder at Lakhipur Police Station stating inter-alia that his niece Radhika has been murdered by Umakant, his father Deoraj & Brother Girdhari. It was also stated that Umakant’s neighbour Sugrib Singh gave the information of murder of Radhika. Shyam Sunder also stated that Sugrib Singh also opposed the in Laws who were in hurry for cremation of dead body of Radhika. He also prevented them with Local people along with Hari Narayan. Hari Narayan told the Police that he came to know that Umakant hit Radhika with footnot of Bamboo on her head. On this basis & the said information, F.I.R. was registered against the 3 accused Umakant, Deoraj and Girdhari u/s 302/34 in crime No. 214/2010. The accused were arrested by Police and produced befor the court which were sent to jail by the order of Magistrate on 25th August, 2010. During investigation the Post mortom report made over the deceased Radhika shows: 1. Both the Lungs are voluminous, water logged congested, a cut section excude froth mixed with blood. 2. Abdomen stomach contains semi digested food materials and full of water with sand particles. 3. One abrassion wound on right side of head. Charge sheet was filed against all the 3 accused u/s 173 Cr. P.C. in the Court. The trial took place in the court of Additional Session Judge of Lakhipur Distt. After considering all the evidences and facts submitted by the prosecution and accused the court gave the judgement on 1st September, 2011- “The Court is of the view that the prosecution has failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt. There is no Eye withness of the case. The Postmortom report also shows that water and sand was found is the abdomen stomach of the deceased Radhika due to drowning in the water of well. No. case of murder was made out. For the forgoing reasons all the three accused Umakant, Deoraj, Girdhari are acquitted from the charge leveled against them u/s 302/34 I.P.C. The Jailor of Lakhipur Distt. Jail is directed to release them from the jail in connection with this case. Being aggrived by the said judgement order of acquitteal of accused. The prosecution through Shyam Sunder filed this appeal before the Hon’ble High Court of Mahakhand with the instant Appeal, attacking the impugned judgement dated 1st September, 2011 that. .. 1. The learned trial court did not considered the full facts of the medical evidence of the doctor who conducted Postmortom on the deceased Radhika. 2. Court did not appreciated the circumstancial Evidences parallel to, since no Eye witness is their in the case 3. The acquittal is improper and against the appreciation of law. The date is fixed for final hearing on 29th September, 2011. Argue on behalf of both the parties.

Gourishkeni says : propert dispute
My father has 3 brothers.We have 3 properties which have 3 brothers as owners and 2 properties which have all 4 as owners.One brother creates problems while it comes to separation of property.Which is the best solution to go for a separation of property ? Is there any court werein 1 of 4 brothers can file for family separation and court will take the hand over of properties and make a settlement,which will be mandatory for all 4 brothers to abide?

Gurchetan singh says : Please help
Sir, With reference to your advise on y case from lawyers club India I am sending an overview of the case.If you could advise me I will be highly obliged. "This court case pertains to my mother vs my maternal uncle (mother’s brother) & his father in law. 2004-Facts are-My mother is one of two sisters and have one brother.My maternal grandfather had ancestral property which was transferred through a sale deed (without any sale consideration-no proof exists of money transfer) to my maternal uncle by his father in law-on the basis of power of attorney granted by my maternal grandfather. No part was paid to my mother or her sister. Subsequently my maternal uncle sold some of the property but did not pay anything to his sisters. Further he transferred majority of the property again to his father in law on the basis of a POA. 2004-A complaint was made regarding this by my mother u/s 406/420/120-B IPC.Both defendants (my maternal uncle & his father inlaw) have been declared proclaimed offenders now. It is pertinent to mention that both of them have been living in Canada since many years. Now my queries are- 1. What should be the nest course of action? 2. Can we move an application in the court requesting that previous registries of land be cancelled and my mother’s share be transferred in her name. 3. Can we inform the Canadian high commission/consulate of this case and request them to take note of the fact that these people are proclaimed offenders. 4. Is there anything which we can do to expedite the proceedings? Any further advise will be highly appreciated. Regards Gurchetan Gil

Dharamveer Nimiwal says : Bond check
I gave a cheque of rs 15000 to the company for job security. But I left the job before the specified time. Now they are not returning the cheque and my account is not having this much balance. Now if the cheque bounces, will it attract NIA 138. I had written "For security purpose only" on backside of cheque.

dinesh says : will
dear expart my grandfather died without wrote a will on his property after my grandmother had wrote a will on my grand-father property this type of will is legaly or not ? can we claim our part on same will basis from our uncle. will has been wrote in 1969

Click here to see all answered queries

Comment Please

Other LCI Experts

Rajendra K Goyal
Queries Replied : 53581

Raj Kumar Makkad
Queries Replied : 44370

Devajyoti Barman
Queries Replied : 34799