WRITS The state and its instrumentalities, such as the police, universities, and other government bodies, exist to serve the nation and fulfil public duties. However, there are times when these very entities violate our rights, leaving us with no other option. In such instances, we can seek help and assistance from the court by applying for special orders known as writs. Thus, writs are special orders issued by superior courts to protect people’s rights and ensure that justice is done. These writs are five in number. These writs serve as an effective mechanism through which the judiciary can uphold the rights of individuals when those rights are violated, particularly by the state or public authorities, and in some cases even by private individuals. In India, two courts have the authority to issue writs: Supreme Court (Article 32): Writs only for fundamental rights. High Courts (Article 226): Writs for fundamental rights and other legal rights. Habeas Corpus Habeas Corpus is a Latin term which literally means “you may have the body”. The writ is issued in the form of an order calling upon a person by whom another person is detained to bring that person before the Court and to let the Court know by what authority he has detained that person. Who can apply for the writ: The general rule is that an application can be made by a person who is illegally detained, But in certain cases, an application of habeas corpus can be made by any person on behalf of the prisoner, i.e., a friend or a relation. Burden of proof The burden of proof to justify detention has always been placed on the detaining authority. Writ against private individual The Supreme Court of India clarified this in the case of Kanu Sanyal v. District Magistrate, Darjeeling (1973). In this landmark judgment, the Court emphasized that the writ of habeas corpus can be issued not only against public authorities but also against private individuals if it is proven that they are unlawfully detaining someone. Case Law and Example: Mohd. Ikram Hussain v. State of U.P. (1964) All Facts: Mohd. Ikram Hussain was arrested and detained by the police under the suspicion of having committed a crime. His family believed that the detention was illegal, as he was not produced before a magistrate within the stipulated time, and there was no legal basis for his continued detention. The family filed a petition in the Allahabad High Court, seeking a writ of habeas corpus to challenge the illegal detention and secure his release. Judgement: The Allahabad High Court issued the writ of habeas corpus and ordered the police to bring Mohd. Ikram Hussain before the court to justify his detention. Upon reviewing the facts, the court found that: The detention was illegal, as the police had not followed due process, including presenting him before a magistrate within the required time. The court directed his immediate release, as there was no valid reason for his continued detention. Similarly, the detention becomes unlawful if a person who is arrested is not produced before the Magistrate within 24 hours of his arrest and he will be entitled to be released on the writ of habeas corpus. It can also be issued in case of child’s custody cases by one parent against the other. Mandamus The word “mandamus” means “the order” or “we command”. When it is used: If a government officer or body is not performing its duty, you can approach the court for a mandamus writ to compel them to act. For instance, a licensing officer is under a duty to issue a licence to an applicant who fulfils all the conditions laid down for the issue of such Licence. But despite the fulfilment of such conditions if the officer or the authority concerned refuses or fails to issue the licence the aggrieved person has a right to seek the remedy through a writ of mandamus. Allahabad High Court issued a writ of mandamus to direct the Regional Passport Officer to issue a passport to the petitioner. (Basoo Yadav v. Union of India, 2022 All) When it will not lie. —A writ of mandamus will not be granted in the following circumstances: (1) When the duty is merely discretionary in nature the writ of mandamus will not lie. State of M. P. v. Mandawara,’ the M. P. Government made a rule making it discretionary to grant dearness allowance to its employees at a particular rate. The Supreme Court held that the writ of mandamus could not be issued to compel the Government to exercise its power. (2) A writ of mandamus does not lie against a private individual or any private organisation because they are not entrusted with a public duty.’ (3) A writ of mandamus cannot be granted to enforce an obligation arising out of contract.’ Prohibition A writ of prohibition literally means “to forbid”. It is issued primarily to prevent an inferior court or tribunal from exceeding its jurisdiction or acting contrary to the rules of natural justice. It is issued by a superior Court to inferior courts for the purpose of preventing inferior Courts from usurping a jurisdiction with which it was not legally vested, or in other words to compel inferior courts to keep within the limits of their jurisdiction. Thus the writ is issued in both cases where there is excess of jurisdiction and where there is absence of jurisdiction. Hari Vishnu Kamath v. Syed Ahmad Ishaque (1955) Facts: This case involved an election dispute where the Election Tribunal’s decision was challenged. Reasoning: The Supreme Court issued a writ of prohibition to prevent the Tribunal from proceeding further, as it had acted beyond its jurisdiction. East India Commercial Co. Ltd. v. Collector of Customs (1962) Facts: This case involved the seizure of goods by customs authorities without proper jurisdiction. Reasoning: The Supreme Court issued a writ of prohibition to prevent the customs authorities from proceeding further, as they had acted beyond their jurisdiction….
Category: judiciary
The Empress vs Gonesh Dooley And Gopi Dooley 1879 Cal
The Empress vs Gonesh Dooley And Gopi Dooley 1879 Cal (Snake Charmer’s Case) JUDGMENT by McDonell, J. Case Facts: Gonesh Dooley was accused of causing the death of a boy by placing a snake on him by exhibiting in public a venomous snake, whose fangs he knew had not been extracted, and to show his own skill, but without any intention to cause harm to anyone, placed the snake on the head of one of the spectators. The spectator in trying to push off the snake was bitten, and died in consequence. Issues Involved Prosecution’s Argument: The prosecution argued that Gonesh intentionally caused the boy’s death by placing the snake on him, knowing it was dangerous. They also argued that Gopi abetted Gonesh by encouraging or assisting him in the act. Defense’s Argument: The defense argued that Gonesh did not have the intention to kill the boy. They claimed it was a reckless act without the knowledge that it would result in death. They also argued that Gopi did not actively participate in the act and should not be held responsible. Court’s Reasoning: Courts Analysis: The court found that Gonesh did not intentionally cause the boy’s death. It was determined that he did not know the act was “so imminently dangerous that it must, in all probability, cause death” (the last clause of murder) Comparison with Previous Case: The court compared this case with another case The Queen v. Poonai Fattemah 1869, where the accused had intentionally caused a snake to bite the victim. The court noted that in Gonesh’s case, there was no such clear intention or knowledge of imminent danger. Without intention but knowledge: Court observed that in this case “that Gonesh did not think that the snake would bite the boy. But we think that the act was done with the knowledge that it was likely to cause death, but without the intention of causing death.” Conclusion: Sentencing: The court found that Gonesh did not have the intention to cause death but acted with the knowledge that his actions were likely to cause death. Therefore, he was sentenced under Section 304 Part II. Gonesh Dooley was sentenced to three years of rigorous imprisonment. Gopi Dooley, who abetted Gonesh, was sentenced to one year of rigorous imprisonment under Sections 114 and 304 of the IPC.
How Asiya Farooq cleared her J&K Prosecuting Officer Exam in 1st attempt ?
Question 1 When did you complete your LLB, was it 3 years or 5 years? Ans. It was 3 year LLB course and completed in 2017. Question 2 When do you start your preparation for PO? Did you start your preparation while doing law or after completion of law? Ans. After completion of the law. I started my preparation in 2021- When the advertisement was out for the post of Prosecuting officer. Question 3 Did you prepare for other states’ PO or judiciary? Ans. I was interested in Jammu and Kashmir judiciary-related exams only There were no posts advertised after 2018 till 2021 so I completed my LLM first when posts came out I Started preparing Question 4 How did you prepare for pre- and mains? Ans. I prepared for mains directly as there was little difference in syllabus like few subjects that were in mains were not in pre and vice versa that I did separately Question 5 Kindly throw some light on main answer writing, how often do you practice answer writing while doing your preparation? Ans. My answer writing skills are strong Alhamdulillah, preparing for mains was not a big deal, still, I will let you all know that this was my first attempt so I started practicing answer writing after I qualified pre, every weekend I solved one paper of previous year mains. Question 6 If GS is a part of the J&K PO exam, how did you prepare for that? Ans. Yes, we had CSAT (Civil Services Aptitude Test) as a qualifying paper in Preliminary for that I didn’t prepare separately. I did that side by side. Every day I used to study 3 hours for that before pre. Question 7 Can you recall some questions which were asked in an interview? Ans. I was asked about Provisions of arrest related to Female Charges, Joinder of Charge, Alteration of Charge, Bail Provisions, National Security Act, and Domestic Violence Act, and the last question was why am I interested in becoming a Prosecuting officer and how will I be dealing with people who don’t know about the law. Question 8 How did you prepare for an interview? Ans. I appeared in a mock interview cum guidance program in Jammu and Kashmir Question 9 Anything else you would like to share with students, especially for Judiciary Aspirants? Ans. The thing that I noticed was that aspirants used to write long answers that is what is not needed. The answer should be precise and directly relevant no other references are needed. Flow charts are scoring. Test series for pre and mains is most needed that I did myself as well. While preparing for this exam I was very focused on my goal, sometimes I lost patience but then I prayed and asked Allah to grant me patience. Consistency is very important. Basics should be very clear and strong, Yes I started preparing for it very late and prepared for one and a half years but my basics were very clear initially. What asiya farooq Say About TOA. I watched videos on TOA, read books, and collected the best material, and I prepared my notes after watching videos and reading books. I took help from everyone who was known to me. • I didn’t just mention the language of law but I also referred to leading cases in every answer Question 10 How does TOA help you in your preparation? Ans. Najeeb sir’s videos have been very helpful as concepts that were earlier not clear became clear to me Honestly speaking I always watched his videos whenever I found myself in difficulty understanding anything. I hope you guys will find it useful, for more such interesting updates, go check out our YouTube channel and social media pages, the links are down below. And don’t forget to drop your feedback in the comments section. Now you can start your preparation for Judicial Services and Prosecution Officer at home with our membership plan for details drop us a message on WhatsApp on this number 8840961324 or visit the link below