Legal Question in Constitutional Law in India

I have two questions regarding Gujarat riots of 2002. A. When law says mob has no face, how can it convict from among a mob, on basis of eyewitnesses who were at the time of attack scared for their lives and hiding. In Best Bakery case, the prime eye witness, along with scores of others, turned hostile and yet there were convictions. Are these judgments defying the basic common sense mentioned above? Are there precedent of moving cases out of a state like SC did in case of Guj riots? B. Recently, Gujarat HC rapped the govt for not repairing Muslim religious places damaged during riots? What is the law on this? Is the govt responsible for rebuilding religious structures? Why are there no legal discussions on these?


Asked on 5/04/12, 6:12 am

1 Answer from Attorneys
www.lawconcern.com S.Seshadri www.lawconcern.com

1.Mob is a group of persons and law provides for conviction of individuals either singly or acting as a part of group if individuals acting in furtherrence of a common illegal intention. Hence individuals who were part of a large mob all whose members are not identified can still be convicted.

2. Regarding the actual convictions allegedly despite some witness havng turned hostile, it depends on the chargesheet and how relevant the evidence of these hostile witnesses were.

3. In special circumstances, cases can be tried out of a state as per orders of Superior Courts.

4. The Government, Union or State Government cannot act unequally based on religion as per Indian Constitution.

5. There are no discussions on these topics in a professional forum like law guru precisely for the reason that the matters are sub-judice.

[email protected]

Read more
Answered on 5/13/12, 12:16 am


Related Questions & Answers

More Constitutional Law questions and answers in India