In ur opinion how far sentence of patiala high court regarding sidhu's controversy is justified?

Question

Are celebrities paying the price of being celebrities coz any common man would have been accquitted in such a case non-intentional murder????????????

Answer 1

Murder is the unlawful killing of one human by another, especially with premeditated malice.Felony-Murder Rule. A rule of law that holds that if a killing occurs during the commission or attempted commission of a felony (a major crime), the person or persons responsible for the felony can be charged with murder.

Generally an intent to kill is not necessary for felony-murder. The rule becomes operative when there is a killing during or a death soon after the felony, and there is some causal connection between the felony and the killing. The felony-murder rule originated in England under the common law. Initially it was strictly applied, encompassing any death that occurred during the course of a felony, regardless of who caused it. Therefore, if a police officer attempting to stop a robbery accidentally shot and killed an innocent passerby, the robber could be charged with murder.

Proximate Cause, as an act from which an injury results as a natural, direct, uninterrupted consequence and without which the injury would not have occurred. Proximate cause is the primary cause of an injury. It is not necessarily the closest cause in time or space nor the first event that sets in motion a sequence of events leading to an injury. Proximate cause produces particular, foreseeable consequences without the intervention of any independent or unforeseeable cause. It is also known as legal cause.

To help determine the proximate cause of an injury in negligence or other tort cases, courts have devised the "but for" or "sine qua non" rule, which considers whether the injury would not have occurred but for the defendant's negligent act. A finding that an injury would not have occurred but for a defendant's act establishes that the particular act or omission is the proximate cause of the harm, but it does not necessarily establish liability since a variety of other factors can come into play in tort actions.

Some jurisdictions apply the "substantial factor" formula to determine proximate cause. This rule considers whether the defendant's conduct was a substantial factor in producing the harm. If the act was a substantial factor in bringing about the damage, then the defendant will be held liable unless she can raise a sufficient defense to rebut the claims.

An Assault can be lethal on some vital areas. If the accused is able to establish that had no intention to kill, it becomes 'Unintentional Murder'. He had efficient lawyers, and a common man perhaps could not have substantiated in a better way. In the case it is a road accident, it is dealt in a different manner.

Answer 2

Arey bhai have you ever read Indian Penal Code. If so you won't ask this question at all. The Section 304 of IPC is very clear in this aspect. Any person who causes death by a violent act is punishable. If that violent act is rash and negligent auto driving then 304(a) come into operation. Do you think the defense lawyers hired by Sidhu are fools? They must have un-turned every stone. Conviction of Sidhu and Shibhu Soren has re imposed confidence on Indian Judicial System. Now we can proudly say that at least one of our democractic pillar is strong and safe. HATS OFF TO THE JUDGES OF SIDHU AND SOREN CASES. GOD BLESS THEM

Answer 3

It is just the other way round. Celebrities have always found a way out and media will do a fantastic job, if you pay them.

Answer 4

Celebrities should be held at a higher standard.

Coach

Answer 5

I need to consult the dead man's close relatives