Brilliant lecture by sir. Sir you are the master of criminal law. For me there are 2 people whose lectures are thought provoking one is the legendary Justice R F nariman and the other Nagamuthu sir. Just by listening to both is more than reading a law book and understanding the concept of law.
A must watch lecture on the "Creativity in Cross Examination", delivered by Mr. Justice [Retd.] Shri S.NAGAMUTHU, Sr.Adv, Supreme Court of India. I am really Thankful to Shri Seshagiri Rao Sir (Admin of Friday Group and this channel) for conducting this lecture. Thanks a Lot, Sir. It was such an enlightening experience to attend this lecture.
Sir very nice to hear your lecture. But I want one clarification regarding CGIT case of temporary lic employees in supreme court of India. Decision of honourable. Justice Gopal gowda sirs judgement 2015 was very historical and in. favour of employees. But all of a sudden the present cji sir has applied 142 sec and gave order in 2022 April 27. Different one . Is it possible to change the judgement of the same Apex court .
Sir , have mentioned a case where the lawyer had not taken written instruction from the client i.e cheif minister ! Could you tell me the case name or incident happened
Sir,,What is the present position of law on declaring witness as hostile.Can a witness be declared hostile by court even without hearing him.Please advise.
This is the murder case referred to me by legal aid to defend the accused. It is a killing of his wife. Accused pleaded guilty into the offence during framing of charge and during 313 crpc proceeding. As far as eye witnesses are concerned, PW1 turned hostile, PW2 and PW3, the eye witnesse's evidence became worthless to prosecution. No other eye witnesses. When the accused was asked by the judge that what do you say about the evidence of witnesses during 313 crpc proceeding, the accused replied every thing is correct. Now argument comes. The judge asked me, sir, the accused admits that whatever the witnesses spoke against him is true, what do you say about this? I rplied to him for this that l also agree for that and accused should be acquitted on the basis of the evidence of PW1toPW3. Because Pw1 turned hostile, Pw2 and Pw3 did not speak about the occurence. So I said accused said the correct thing. Yet the accused was given life imprisonment. Is it a correct judgment? Friday Group, please explain.
Depends on the reason highlighted in his judgment by the honourable judge to convict the accused... You can appeal to the hounourable HC if you find the reasons are not as per the law...
What the accused statement have two parts incupmatory and excupmatory if he admit in charge that he is guilty then bcz court wants evidence went forward under sec313 the further admit the statement of witmess which makes case intersting as per you now how marshelling of evidence is done is also intersting only commet further by reading the judgement plz share it
Thanks to Senior Counsel JSN .Its always good to hear you.Please continue to enlighten juniors and law students like us through your talks.
As non-lawyer, this lecture is very helpful to understand how to behave in court and what the rights of common citizens are
Brilliant lecture by sir. Sir you are the master of criminal law. For me there are 2 people whose lectures are thought provoking one is the legendary Justice R F nariman and the other Nagamuthu sir. Just by listening to both is more than reading a law book and understanding the concept of law.
A must watch lecture on the "Creativity in Cross Examination", delivered by Mr. Justice [Retd.] Shri S.NAGAMUTHU, Sr.Adv, Supreme Court of India. I am really Thankful to Shri Seshagiri Rao Sir (Admin of Friday Group and this channel) for conducting this lecture. Thanks a Lot, Sir. It was such an enlightening experience to attend this lecture.
Thank you Friday group for sharing this, it was really interesting, specially that the questions that need not be answered by the witness.
Peerless, marvelous lecture Sir.
Justice Nagamutthu sir is always great👍
Fantastic and fabulous
1:03:18 this gentleman has a very commanding voice!
Sir plz request Justice Nagamuthu sir to deliver lecture on how to conduct criminal appeal also.
Excellent session. Please bring J Nagamuthu again.
Extremely useful sir.
Regards.
Superb
Very excellent sir
How To Contact Nagmuthu Sir
humble Namaste sir
the best book of evidence act for trial court layer
Dhananjay Singh advocate kushinagar UP
thanks
Please can I know how to contact Sir Senior Advocate and Retd Justice S Nagamuthu sir?
sir, please explain the responsibility of the Accused on the subject of " plea of alibi" and the effect of unproved alibi..
Sir very nice to hear your lecture. But I want one clarification regarding CGIT case of temporary lic employees in supreme court of India. Decision of honourable. Justice Gopal gowda sirs judgement 2015 was very historical and in. favour of employees. But all of a sudden the present cji sir has applied 142 sec and gave order in 2022 April 27. Different one . Is it possible to change the judgement of the same Apex court .
❤
Sir , have mentioned a case where the lawyer had not taken written instruction from the client i.e cheif minister !
Could you tell me the case name or incident happened
Sir,,What is the present position of law on declaring witness as hostile.Can a witness be declared hostile by court even without hearing him.Please advise.
😊😊😊
This is the murder case referred to me by legal aid to defend the accused. It is a killing of his wife. Accused pleaded guilty into the offence during framing of charge and during 313 crpc proceeding. As far as eye witnesses are concerned, PW1 turned hostile, PW2 and PW3, the eye witnesse's evidence became worthless to prosecution. No other eye witnesses. When the accused was asked by the judge that what do you say about the evidence of witnesses during 313 crpc proceeding, the accused replied every thing is correct. Now argument comes. The judge asked me, sir, the accused admits that whatever the witnesses spoke against him is true, what do you say about this? I rplied to him for this that l also agree for that and accused should be acquitted on the basis of the evidence of PW1toPW3. Because Pw1 turned hostile, Pw2 and Pw3 did not speak about the occurence. So I said accused said the correct thing. Yet the accused was given life imprisonment. Is it a correct judgment? Friday Group, please explain.
No
Depends on the reason highlighted in his judgment by the honourable judge to convict the accused... You can appeal to the hounourable HC if you find the reasons are not as per the law...
What the accused statement have two parts incupmatory and excupmatory if he admit in charge that he is guilty then bcz court wants evidence went forward under sec313 the further admit the statement of witmess which makes case intersting as per you now how marshelling of evidence is done is also intersting only commet further by reading the judgement plz share it
nice
❤