Share on Facebook

Share on Twitter

Share on LinkedIn

Share on Email

Share More

Shree. ( Advocate.)     14 December 2008

Lawyers refuse to take up arrested terrorist's case!!!!!!!

Lawyers refuse to take up arrested terrorist's case!!

Several criminal lawyers in Mumbai have refused to take up the case of Mohammad Ajmal Amin Iman alias Kasab, the sole man arrested in connection with last week''s terrorist carnage here, citing ethical constraints.

A resolution was passed unanimously by the Bombay Metropolitan Magistrate Court's Bar Association, which has more than 1,000 members, saying that none of its members will defend any of the accused of the terror attacks.

Kasab was arrested on November 26, the day the terrorists struck at different locations in Mumbai.

Senior criminal lawyer Majeed Memon said, "There are certain ethical restrains which may stop a conscientious lawyer from defending certain accused persons. When a lawyer is aware that the accused was in fact caught red handed committing an extremely serious offence, there is no question of us appearing in this case."

Advocate Mubin Solkar, appearing for accused in the 7/11 Mumbai serial train blasts case and the recent Indian Mujahideen case, agreed with Memon and said, "Although it is unconstitutional to refuse legal aid to any accused, we have seen with our own eyes the arrested terrorist shooting at innocent people. Aiding him means burning our own fingers."

Criminal lawyer Shahid Azmi pointed out that no bar association can pass such a resolution asking lawyers not to take up a particular case and that it is up to the sole discretion of the lawyer whether or not to defend an accused.

Article Source:https://www.mynews.in/fullstory.aspx?storyid=13424

EXPRESS YOUR VIEWS.



Learning

 22 Replies

N.K.Assumi (Advocate)     14 December 2008

Dear Shree Ji, I agree with lawyer Shahid Azmi. Yes, there are clear evidence against them but trial is trial and lawyer has to defend them. We can not just send a person to the gallow without trial otherwise our legal systems will be condemned by others.

Rekha..... ( Practicing lawyer(B.Com LL.M in Business law ))     14 December 2008

Dear Respected Sirs,


With all due respect  I need to know that

Can’t V go in International Court of Justice for the said genocide?

N.K.Assumi (Advocate)     14 December 2008

Yes, Rekha Ji, It is my humble opinion that ICC is the best forum to try those terrorist for their Crimes against Humanity.

Ravi Arora (Advocate)     14 December 2008

No need of expressing views ,


 Just HANG him,  othere wise any political praty  will  Hang the metter because of personal political   INTEREST  ,


As the Afzal case is still pending  or we will see some other case of Razia OR Kandhar;


We have seen with our own eyes the arrested terrorist shooting at innocent people


After all we are INDIAN frist And than Advoccates


There are certain ethical restrains which may stop a conscientious lawyer from defending certain accused persons. When a lawyer is aware that the accused was in fact caught red handed committing an extremely serious offence, there is no question of us appearing in this case."                    As advocate this not right


that no bar association can pass such a resolution asking lawyers not to take up a particular case and that it is up to the sole discretion of the lawyer whether or not to defend an accused.   this  is right


But sir its time to be indian, every thing is right as it comes to our country our innocent people of the country


 

AEJAZ AHMED (Legal Consultant/Lawyer)     14 December 2008

Refusing to take up case of terrorist ‘inappropriate’: CJI



Zeenews Bureau



New Delhi, Dec 13: Chief Justice of India KG Balakrishnan on Saturday termed as “inappropriate” the decision taken by the Mumbai lawyers not to take up the case of terrorist Ajmal Kasab, who was caught alive by the security forces during their operation in Mumbai last week. 



The CJI is believed to have said that it would be unconstitutional to refuse legal aid to any accused.



The CJI made this comment while addressing the inaugural ceremony of the two-day International Conference of Jurists on Terrorism, the Role of Law and Human Rights, in New Delhi.



Balakrishnan’ reactions came days after several criminal lawyers in Mumbai categorically refused to take up the case of Ajmal Amir Kasab, in the wake of terror attacks in Mumbai.



A resolution in this regard was also passed by the Bombay Metropolitan Magistrate Court's Bar Association, which has more than 1,000 members, saying that none of its members will defend any of the accused of the terror attacks.



Kasab was arrested on November 26, the day the terrorists struck at different locations in Mumbai.

Senior criminal lawyer Majeed Memon said, "There are certain ethical restrains which may stop a conscientious lawyer from defending certain accused persons. When a lawyer is aware that the accused was in fact caught red handed committing an extremely serious offence, there is no question of us appearing in this case."



However, the decision also faced criticism from some sections of lawyers who said pointed out that no bar association can pass such a resolution asking lawyers not to take up a particular case and that it is up to the sole discretion of the lawyer whether or not to defend an accused.

Shree. ( Advocate.)     14 December 2008

Dear all,


 Plz gothrough the following news also:


No lawyer can refuse to defend an accused: Jethmalani



New Delhi, Dec 14: With certain lawyer bodies declining to take up the case of Mohammad Ajmal Amir Kasab, the lone militant arrested in the Mumbai terror attacks, eminent lawyer Ram Jethmalani on Sunday maintained that no lawyer has the right to say he will not defend an accused.



"There is the express rule of the Bar Council of India that no lawyer shall refuse to defend a person on the grounds that it will make him unpopular," Jethmalani said.



"That is something that should never worry a lawyer. No lawyer worth the name should even talk about this kind of a thing," Jethmalani said and asked the legal community not to worry about peer criticism while taking up such cases.



"No lawyer has the right to say that he will not defend an accused," the eminent jurist told a news channel.



Asked whether he had been approached to defend the terrorist, he said, "Has Kasab asked me? Let him ask me and I will tell him. Let the Pakistan High Commission approach me and I will give them a proper reply and advise."



Jethmalani said that a lawyer should advise his client on the basis of facts. "The lawyer's duty is to say that on the facts I find no defence. The man is guilty on his own confession... unless he instructs the lawyer, the confession was obtained by some force or fraud or whatever, which is very unlikely".



"A lawyer should be able to tell him (the terrorist) that either hanging or life imprisonment is your option.



"If you want me to tell the court that you should receive life imprisonment I am prepared to do my best," Jethmalani said.



On the terror attacks, he said, "According to me, a person who thinks that by doing these actions, he is going to heaven he should be denied the chance to go to heaven, he should remain the rest of life in a jail in India".





Shree. ( Advocate.)     14 December 2008


Dear All,


Prosecution Lawyer(PL): The job of PL is to present evidence, witnesses and explain circumstances under which a criminal act happened. All this, with a view to prove the guilt of the accused.


Defence Lawyer(DL): The job of DL is to examine evidence, cross-examine witnesses, explain circumstance and perhaps also to present witnesses and evidence. All this, with a view to establish either “reasonable doubt” or complete innocense of the accused.


State/Police: To investigate a criminal act, find evidence and witnesses so as to find and apprehend those like to have committed the crime. Then, with the help of PL, to prepare a case against the accused.


Judge(s): To examine all the facts presented before them, to listen to both sides and then to pronounce a judgement.


Rather than the DL to convince himself of the client’s innocense, it the PL and the Police who have to convince themselves of the person’s guilt so as to be able to present him as an “accused”. It is the PL and Police’s job to prepare a foolproof case against the accused. The DL’s job, in a way, is to pick holes in such a case - whether technical, procedural or factual.


It is not the DL’s job to act on something he “knows” is his “heart of hearts”. He *must* act in his client’s best interests. If he knows that he can get his client free because of poor investigation, he *must* do exactly that.


Now assume that a criminal gets acquitted and then goes on to commit more crimes. Whose responsibility is that? It is the responsibility (in a moral sense) of PL and/or the Police, not of the DL.


If the DLs were to start sitting in judgement on their clients, the criminal justice system would not work.



 

Rajan Salvi (Lawyer)     14 December 2008

Rule of law should prevail. No person will be condemned unheard. By all means , he should be defended. Before convicting a person , is it not necessary to ascertain whether he is guilty of the crime or not?  Will the evidence of persons who saw the terrorist actually shooting on a 1.5" X2" screen be relevant? The terrorist can be convicted after clear, cogent and unimpeachable evidence as to his guilt. HOWEVER MY ONLY PRAYER IS THAT IT SHOULD NOT BE PROLONGED LIKE CHEWING GUM. ONE YEAR , AT THE MOST.

K.C.Suresh (Advocate)     15 December 2008

The Mumbai Bar association has committed a grave error. due to sentiments.  No person shall be let undefended. So the fairness requires that the accused, whether he is a terrorist or cold blooded seriel killer he must be defended. No advocate is expected to be senti of the reality. He must be ruled, followed and guided by the professional dignity and decorum and perfectly keep the law of the land in tact in his hands. As Shree pointed out we have limited role i n the court.  We have to defend the accused not for an acquittal. But we are aiding the court to do justice. we are leading evidence to arrive at a safe conclusion without any error on facts, circumstances. It is not the duty of the advocate to get an acquittal to his accused. He must be fair to court, to his client, to public and above all to law. Why we are forgetting the Ragive gandhi murder case. it was done by cruel terrorists. but we have defended. We parliament case they were defended. Above all we have Indirajis case. They were also defended. Then why cann't we defend the terrorist who attacked Mumbai. Let the justice be done in its own usual course.

MUNEESH DHAWAN (Advocate)     15 December 2008

My view is that in case of terriorists emotions should run high in every indian & lets stop acting like intellectuals in this hour.....he should be hanged without any trial whatsoever..Every Indian irrespective of caste & religion should think like this..(these are my opinion without critising anybody's point of view)..

Adv.Shine Thomas (Advocate)     15 December 2008

Assistance of a lawyer is a constitutional right (Art.21) available to the accused.It cannot be denied by anyone.

MUNEESH DHAWAN (Advocate)     15 December 2008

I am well aware of constitutional provisions & have full respect for the same..however my view is only to the extent, that no lawyer should come in defense of enemy of our country...

Rekha..... ( Practicing lawyer(B.Com LL.M in Business law ))     15 December 2008

 


Respected Sirs

 

With all due respect

 

Just presumes that V r defending the terrorist and then what?

V r definitely going to convince the Hon’ble Court to give him Death Penalty and then what?

V hv to wait 4 to 5 years for his death Penalty and then what?

V will file “Mercy Petition as V r very much loyal to our professional duty and then the terrorist will get life imprisonment and then what?

Should V wait to happen another Kandhar Hijacking.?

Our Security forces hv laid down their lives to save our nation from these terrorists and V r defending very same terrorist. How it looks. Just think sirs. Indeed sirs my blood is boiling.

The Central Government is under tremendous pressure because the emotions r running high in our Nation. Not because of our professional loyalty.

 

I may be wrong but after obtaining all valuable information from the terrorist just Gunned down him when he may be on the way to any court and call as an Accident. And Pl. declare War against Pakistan. War Brings Peace. Believe me sirs.

Rajan Salvi (Lawyer)     21 December 2008

See the movie 'Wednesday'. Anupam Kher, Nasirrudin Shah. SUPERB.


Leave a reply

Your are not logged in . Please login to post replies

Click here to Login / Register  


Start a New Discussion Unreplied Threads


Popular Discussion


view more »




Post a Suggestion for LCI Team
Post a Legal Query