On 17 February 2011 17:00, Santosh Helekar <[email protected]> wrote:
To ascertain the accuracy of what I have stated in respect of the
current Indian and pre-1961 Portuguese criminal justice systems,
please read the legal treatise entitled "Criminal Justice India Series:
Goa, 2002" written by D. Banerjea of the West Bengal National
University of Juridical Sciences. Here is the pertinent quote on page
137 of that book:
QUOTE
Under the Portuguese system, after investigation, if an offender was
charged with crime, then he was, generally speaking, presumed to be
guilty and the onus was on the offender during trial to prove his
innocence; whereas under the Indian system, the accused is presumed to
be innocent and the burden is entirely on the prosecution to prove his
guilt and the Magistrate must hold him guilty beyond any shadow of doubt.
UNQUOTE
.....Criminal Justice India Series: Goa, 2002, Page 137, Lines 12 - 17.
Since I do not have a legal background I would appreciate it if Jose or
anybody else could contradict the above statement by quoting from a
legal document or book with greater authority and reliability, if any
such item exists.
RESPONSE:
I invite us to read what we have written antes. There are specific Acts
that I have mentioned. If we are to have a logical debate, I suggest
that we look at these Acts and ascertain WHERE the 'burden' lies - as a
result of these Acts.
Santosh had written:
[1] Gabriel is mistaken. India's judicial system practices the principle
of innocent until proven guilty.
[2] It was in the Portuguese system in Goa that a person who was charged
by the police state as being guilty had to prove his innocence.
JC had written (excerpted and accentuated):
re#1: Please review the Goa Children's Act 2003 (as amended) ALSO
comment on the relatively new Domestic Violence Acts in India.
re#2: This is incorrect. The only difference between the Portuguese
judicial system in Goa and the British/Judicial system is that the
former is based on Roman/civil law (inquisitorial system) while the
later is based on common law (adversarial system). The EU has the
benefit (now) of EU law and the European Court of Human Rights.
I hope we have noted that when the police 'charge' someone, the case
enters the realm of the courts.
Santosh's comment is grossly offensive to the very learned and
distinguished Goan judges who served Portuguese-Goa admirably. They and
the Judicial system should be distinguished from the select few arrogant
"police folks" who meted out alleged-justice before the judicial system
got to see the cases. I ask: Any different now? BTW: most of the "Goa
Policia" were Goans. The list of Goa policia can be researched and would
make good reading. Almost all of them came back and joined IPS in Jan
1962. Prabhakar Sinari and Dr. Raut Desai should be able to help.
As far as the status of "law" in a 'POLICE state' is concerned, please
compare the POLICE States WHEREVER they exist and advise IF there is a
difference on Feb 17, 2011.
At this moment, I do not intend to comment on some book - without
researching the author and his/her references. I have made my comment
and Invitation is open for anyone to prove me wrong.
Back to what I am doing. No further response from me on this topic until
last week of March.
jc
