INTRODUCTION OF FORENSIC PSYCHOLOGY TO THE LAW AND JUDICIARY OF INDIA BY INDIAN EVIDENCE ACT OF 1872 -CLAUSE 45 "OPINION OF EXPERTS" PIL SC
http://rapidshare.com/files/94369784/
An_Evaluation_of_Credibility_of_
Forensic_Psychology_in-3.ppt.html
http://rapidshare.com/files/106019428/Created_ by_Mamta_Kalr3-katyani_mata.doc.html
CREDITS FOR THE ABOVE RESEARCH GOES TO:-
1.MY GRANDFATHER -LATE SHRI NATHU SHAH DHODY -ACCOUNTS -AOC ARMY ORDNANCE CORPS -SENIOR MANAGEMENT; KHAMARIA .JABALPUR.MADHYA PRADESH.
2.MY FATHER LATE -SHRI JAGDISH CHANDRA DHODY,SENIOR MANAGEMENT -UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY LTD..TAMILNADU.
3.JUSTICE ADHIKARI OF MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT JABALPUR WHO LOST HIS LIFE IN THIS ENDEAVOR AND BEQUEATHED THE LEGACY OF THE INDIAN EVIDENCE ACT OF 1872 TO THE NATION.
http://mphighcourt.nic.in/history_mp.htm
On 1st of November 1956 the States Reorganization Act was enacted. The new state of Madhya Pradesh was constituted under S.9 thereof. Subsection (1) of Section 49 of the States Re-organization Act ordained that from the appointed day i.e., 1st of November 1956, the High Court exercising jurisdiction, in relation to the existing state of Madhya Pradesh, i.e. Nagpur High Court, shall be deemed to be the High Court for the present state of Madhya Pradesh. Thus Nagpur High Court was not abolished but by a legal fiction it became High Court for the new state of Madhya Pradesh with its seat at Jabalpur.
SEVERE NEEDLE MARKS ON A SAINT'S HANDS ON 1-1-2008 AT 12:30 PM.NO ONE TO CARE PERSONALLY OR ---------
PLEASE ALSO SEE MY LIFE AND ITS USELESSNESS.PLEASE SEE WHAT ISLAMIC AND SIKH TERRORISTS HAVE DONE TO MY FAMILY FOR FIGHTING AGAINST ORGANISED CRIME OF BUILDER MECCA AND MEDINA OSAMA.
PLEASE ALSO SEE WHAT EXISTS AT THE DOME OF THE ROCK FOR CHRISTAINS AND THE GRAVE MESSAGE AT SACRED HEART CATHEDRAL.
RUSSIANS CELEBRATE CHRISTMAS EXACTLY 13 DAYS AFTER THE 25TH OF DECEMBER THAT IS ON 7TH OF JANUARY EVERY YEAR.
PIL IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FOR A REGULATORY BODY FOR BANK FRAUDS AND MOUNTING NPAS IN PUBLIC SECTOR BANKS.
To,
The Chief Justice of
Supreme Court of
Dated
This is a public Interest Litigation on behalf of Public Sector Banks with the threat of Islamic Banking looming large ,which is not only interest free banking ,but will bring with it all terrorist funding to India.Please peruse through article submitted.Please see that the State Bank of India is heaving under massive NPAS and on the other side is the threat of Islamic banking ,both resulting in gross misappropriation of Public funds .The spirit of nationalization of banks was minimum investment in speculation and quote:-
“use of bank credit for speculative and other non productive purposes to be curbed.”
But in the race of industrialization and entry of foreign Banks in
The public interest litigation after perusal through documents submitted is :-
That the Supreme Court of India should appoint a:-
1. “Separate regulatory body for matters of Public Sector Banks ,separate Court for NPAS and other such Banking matters for early and easy disposal of Banking matters, fraud ,cases against officers; ect .; with a mandatory panel of experts from the Banking industry comprising of retired CGMS,and other senior authority from all over India as well as the Head Office at Mumbai, like SBI ,Chairman , Mr.A.K.Purwar , hence forth Mr.O.P.Bhatt in 2011 and so on , for a period of say three years.
2.A panel of EXPERTS from the banking industry assisting the courts in matters related to them will not only facilitate the easy disposal of cases ,but also provide employment and security to the senior management ,when they take decisions against mafia controlled business houses especially in the Builder industry , for access to public funds for crime and terror.
PLEASE REFER TO THE CASE SUBMITTED
GANAPATHY UDYOG ---DEFENDANT/ PETITIONER
VERSUS
PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK—PLANITIFF/RESPONDENT 1996 ISJ(BANKING) 435.
The
Mamta Dhody Kalra
1513,Outram Lane,
Mukherjee Nagar,
Delhi-9
Ring 011-27605550.
AS IT IS AFTER THE BREAK UP OF THE SOVIET UNION IN 1991 AS WELL AS THE WARSAW PACT ,AMERICA PROTECTED ITSELF FROM PSYCHOLOGICAL TERRORISM OF BREAKING HOMES BY FANATICAL ISLAMISTS BY INTRODUCING FORENSIC PSYCHOLOGY IN ITS JUDICIARY.
THERE IS PROVISION FOR THE SAME IN THE INDIAN EVIDENCE ACT OF 1872-CLAUSE 45-"OPINION OF EXPERTS".THIS WAS TOLD TO ME BY JUSTICE ADHIKARI OF JABALPUR HIGH COURT WHO SUPPOSEDLY BLEW HIS BRIANS OUT IN 1987 WITH HIS LICENSED REVOLVER ;IN HIS BATHROOM FOR ALLEGED AFFAIR OF HIS WIFE WITH ANOTHER MAN.
BOTH THE HUSBAND AND WIFE WERE RITUALISTIC HONEST PURE WORKING QUALIFIED LAWYERS & BENGALIS ,WHO HAD A LOVING HOME AND KIDS AND THIS REASON FOR DEATH PURPORTED BY THE JABALPUR POLICE AS WELL AS THE INVESTIGATING AGENCIES WAS THE UNKINDEST CUT OF ALL.
IT WAS ON HIS ADVISE AND MY FATHERS EXTREME DEDICATION TO THE COUNTRY,MY GRANDFATHER BEING IN THE ARMY ACCOUNTS OF ORDNANCE CORPS ,JABALPUR,THAT I DID MY POSTGRADUATION IN PURE PSYCHOLOGY AND SUBMITED AT DELHI UNIVERSITY MY SYNOPSIS TO INTRODUCE FORENSIC PSYCHOLOGY TO THE LAW AND JUDICIARY OF INDIA TO INTRODUCE ACCOUNTABILITY IN MENS REA JUDGEMENTS WHICH SIMPLY TRANSLATED MEANS "GUILTY MIND"
THIS WAS DONE ON 10-10-2005 WHICH HAPPENS TO BE "MENTAL HEALTH DAY AS ALSO THE LATE FILM MAKER GURUDUTT'S DEATH ANNIVERSARY 10-10-1964-FALLING IN THE SAME YEAR AS NEHRUJI'S DEATH 27-5-1964
THE INDIAN EVIDENCE ACT, 1872ACT No. 1 OF 1872*[15th March, 1872 .]Preamble.amend the law of Evidence;It is hereby enacted as follows:--PART IRELEVANCY OF FACTS
Afterwards, C is prosecuted for bigamy in marrying B during A's
lifetime. C says that she never was A's wife.
The judgment against B is irrelevant as against C.
(c) A prosecutes B for stealing a cow from him. B is convicted.
A afterwards sues C for the cow, which B had sold to him before
his conviction. As between A and C, the judgment against B is
irrelevant.
(d) A has obtained a decree for the possession of land against B.
C, B's son, murders A in consequence.
The existence of the judgment is relevant, as showing motive for
a crime.
1*[(e) A is charged with theft and with having been previously
convicted of theft. The previous conviction is relevant as a fact in
issue.
(f) A is tried for the murder of B. The fact that B prosecuted A
for libel and that A was convicted and sentenced is relevant under
section 8 as showing the motive for the fact in issue.]
44.
Fraud or collusion in obtaining judgment, or incompetency of Court,
may be proved.
44. Fraud or collusion in obtaining judgment, or incompetency of
Court, may be proved.-Any party to a suit or other proceeding may show
that any judgment, order or decree which is relevant under section
40,41 or 42, and which has been proved by the adverse party, was
delivered by a Court not competent to deliver it, or was obtained by
fraud or collusion.
OPINIONS OF THIRD PERSONS WHEN RELEVANT
45.
Opinions of experts.
45. Opinions of experts.-When the Court has to form an opinion
upon a point of foreign law, or of science, or art, or as to identity
of handwriting 2*[or finger impressions], the opinions upon that point
of persons specially skilled in such foreign law, science or art,
3*[or in questions as to identity of handwriting] 2*[or finger
impressions] are relevant facts.
Such persons are called experts.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Ins. by Act 3 of 1891, s. 5.
2. Ins. by Act 5 of 1899, s. 3. For discussion in Council as to
whether " finger impressions" include "thumb impressions," see
Gazette of
3. Ins. by Act 18 of 1872, s. 4.
24
Illustrations
(a) The questions is, whether the death of A was caused by
poison.
The opinions of experts as to the symptoms produced by the poison
by which A is supposed to have died, are relevant.
(b) The question is, whether A, at the time of doing a certain
act, was, by reason of unsoundness of mind, incapable of knowing the
nature of the act, or that he was doing what was either wrong or
contrary to law.
The opinions of experts upon the question whether the symptoms
exhibited by A commonly show unsoundness of mind, and whether such
unsoundness of mind usually renders persons incapable of knowing the
nature of the acts which they do, or of knowing that what they do is
either wrong or contrary to law, are relevant.
(c) The question is, whether a certain document was written by A.
Another document is produced which is proved or admitted to have been
written by A.
The opinions of experts on the question whether the two documents
were written by the same person or by different persons, are relevant.
Facts bearing upon opinions of experts.
46. Facts bearing upon opinions of experts.-Facts, not otherwise
relevant, are relevant if they support or are inconsistent with the
opinions of experts, when such opinions are relevant.
Illustrations
(a) The question is, whether A was poisoned by a certain poison.
The fact that other persons, who were poisoned by that poison,
exhibited certain symptoms which experts affirm or deny to be the
symptoms of that poison, is relevant.
(b) The question is, whether an obstruction to a harbour is
caused by a certain sea-wall.
The fact that other harbours similarly situated in other
respects, but where there were no such sea-walls, began to be
obstructed at about the same time, is relevant.
47.
Opinion as to handwriting, when relevant.
47. Opinion as to hand-writing, when relevant.-When the Court has
to form an opinion as to the person by whom any document was written
or signed, the opinion of any person acquainted with the handwriting
of the person by whom it is supposed to be written or signed that it
was or was not written or signed by that person, is a relevant fact.
Explanation.--A person is said to be acquainted with the
handwriting of another person when he has seen that person write, or
when he has received documents purporting to be written by that person
in answer to documents written by himself or under his authority and
addressed to that person, or when, in the ordinary course of business,
documents purporting to be written by that person have been habitually
submitted to him.
25
Illustration
The question is, whether a given letter is in the handwriting of
A, a merchant in
B is a merchant in
A and received letters purporting to be written by him. C, is B's
clerk, whose duty it was to examine and file B's correspondence. D is
B's broker, to whom B habitually submitted the letters purporting to
be written by A for the purpose of advising with him thereon.
The opinions of B, C and D on the question whether the letter is
in the handwriting of A are relevant, though neither B, C nor D ever
saw A write.
48.
Opinion as to existence of right or custom, when relevant.
48. Opinion as to existence of right or custom, when relevant.-
When the Court has to form an opinion as to the existence of any
general custom or right, the opinions, as to the existence of such
custom or right, of persons who would be likely to know of its
existence if it existed, are relevant.
Explanation.--The expression "general custom or right" includes
customs or rights common to any considerable class of persons.
Illustration
The right of the villagers of a particular village to use the
water of a particular well is a general right within the meaning of
this section.
49.
Opinion as to usages, tenets, etc., when relevant.
49. Opinion as to usages, tenets, etc., when relevant.-When the
Court has to form an opinion as to--
the usages and tenets of any body of men or family,
the constitution and government of any religious or
charitable foundation, or
or by particular classes of people,
the opinions of persons having special means of knowledge thereon, are
relevant facts.
50.
Opinion on relationship, when relevant.
50. Opinion on relationship, when relevant.-When the Court has to
form an opinion as to the relationship of one person to another, the
opinion, expressed by conduct, as to the existence of such
relationship, of any person who, as a member of the family or
otherwise, has special means of knowledge on the subject, is a
relevant fact:
Provided that such opinion shall not be sufficient to prove a
marriage in proceedings under the Indian Divorce Act (4 of 1869), or
in prosecutions under sections 494, 495, 497 or 498 of the Indian
Penal Code (45 of 1860).
26
Illustrations
(a) The question is, whether A and B, were married.
The fact that they were usually received and treated by their
friends as husband and wife, is relevant.
(b) The question is, whether A was the legitimate son of B. The
fact that A was always treated as such by members of the family, is
relevant.
51.
Grounds of opinion, when relevant.
51. Grounds of opinion, when relevant.-Whenever the opinion of
any living person is relevant, the grounds on which such opinion is
based are also relevant.
Illustration
An expert may give an account of experiments performed by him for
the purpose of forming his opinion.
CHARACTER WHEN RELEVANT
In civil cases character to prove conduct imputed, irrelevant
52. In civil cases character to prove conduct imputed,
irrelevant.-In civil cases the fact that the character of any person
concerned is such as to render probable or improbable any conduct
imputed to him is irrelevant, except in so far as such character
appears from facts otherwise relevant.
53.
In criminal cases previous good character relevant.
53. In criminal cases previous good character relevant.-In
criminal proceedings the fact that the person accused is of a good
character is relevant.
54.
Previous bad character not relevant, except in reply.
1*[54. Previous bad character not relevant, except in reply.-In
criminal proceedings the fact that the accused person has a bad
character is irrelevant, unless evidence has been given that he has a
good character, in which case it becomes relevant.
No comments:
Post a Comment