Looks really good….both Rani and Vidya are in form!
This entry was posted on December 31, 2010 at 5:01 AM and is filed under the ugly . You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed
You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
57 Responses to “No One Killed Jessica trailers (updated)”
At last a courtroom drama. Real too.
Good to see Rani back that too in a challenging role (after dil bole hadipa debacle). Vidya is suitably subdued but does seem to show pent up emotions.
Altogether, a promising film.
Liked the dialgoue with the man ‘on the chchat’.
I’m wondering whether one can reproduce the actual words from the courtroom.
I didn’t wonder about the dialogues spoken in the trailer as being ‘real’ mksrooney.
It was just a general wondering in cases such as these which happen to be from real lfe happenings.
I’m not surprised that they are using different names though.
looks good, hopefully it’s not too ott and melodramatic. I find rani kind of annoying now.
What’s the deal with this case, it seems like i’ve been hearing about it for years. Is the case over? or is it still going on? last i heard was that the accused was found not guilty. From what I’ve read it seemed like it was pretty obvious that he was guilty, but got away due to power/influence/connections…It’s a shame if that’s true. Hopefully the movie sticks to the facts and is authentic.
The accused has been proven guilty in the High Court. I believe a Supreme Court verdict is awaited. In the mean time, Manu Sharma, who’s the son of a very influential and wealthy politician (Congress) remains behind bars.
Thanks for the info Saket. That’s good to know that he’s at least in prison right now. How long has this case been going on? Is it common for cases to drag on for so long?
Very common (cases tend to move more quickly where the defendant is poor/can’t afford lawyers to pore over every detail, etc. That’s true in the US too, although even at the best of times the Indian judiciary’s backlog is of a wholly different order of magnitude). Yes Sharma is in jail but it is still sad, as absent a HUGE public outcry he would likely have gotten off (see: large number of other influential accused rapists and murderers who manage to get off).
Aside: one weird thing about this film is that the case was/is SO high profile in India that far more people have followed the news stories on/coverage of it than will ever watch this movie!
@ q bhai – i am sure MEDIA would givemore publicity to this film asd this was their victory in their own words to serve justice in this country.. though i feel they went higly overboard here.. but i guess it was tit for tat.. mechanism.
ndtv had released a recorded tape of Manu confessing crime and yup the matter is decided by apex court and i am posting the Judgement with brief para and links.. and also
the transcript of Ndtv of Manu sharma confession (but not allowed under indian evidence as (s. 25-30 ) says confession to police not a evidence in indian laws.
saket the case was decided by Hon’ble apex court please see my detailed comment below with the material para of THAT judgement.. and u would see he’s proved guilty. and appeal was dismissed, and i have added Apex Copurt’s remark on Media also.
So what evenif manu sharma is found guilty, last heard manu sharma was in controversy when he was found in pubs late nights and roaming freely. he gets released every second month that also for a period of a month or more. Last time he was released onthe pretext of his mother being ill and to support his family business though her mother was found inaugerating some function . Once he was released to attend his relative’s funeral that also for around month. Though media raised question many times over it but sheila dixit gave some lame excuse.his family is very powerful in delhi politics. Bhai log.. Everywhere in india only corruption and power rules.
EXCUSE ME guys VERDICT IS OUT AND CLEAR..19th APRIL THIS YEAR.. or else i would have been first one agsainst this film!! (he was out on parole for her grandmother health being bad.. recently thats it.)
official text of the judgement of Hon’ble Apex Court in india-
“154) In the light of the above discussion, we hold that the prosecution has established its case beyond doubt against the appellants and we are in agreement with the conclusion arrived at by the High Court, consequently, all the appeals are devoid of any merit and are accordingly dismissed.”
1) The appellate Court has all the necessary powers to re- evaluate the evidence let in before the trial Court as well as the conclusions reached. It has a duty to specify the compelling and substantial reasons in case it reverses the order of acquittal passed by the trial Court. In the case on hand, the High Court by adhering to all the ingredients and by giving cogent and adequate reasons reversed the order of acquittal.
226
2) The presence of the accused at the scene of crime is proved through the ocular testimonies of PWs 1, 2, 6, 20, 23, 24 and 70, corroborated by Ex PW 12/D-I as well as 3 PCR calls Ex PW 11/A, B and C.
3) Phone calls made immediately after an incident to the police constitutes an FIR only when they are not vague and cryptic. Calls purely for the reason of getting the police to the scene of crime do not necessarily constitute the FIR. In the present case, the phone calls were vague and therefore could not be registered as the FIR. The FIR was properly lodged as per the statement of Shyan Munshi PW-2.
4) Delay in recording the statement of the witnesses do not necessarily discredit their testimonies. The court may rely on such testimonies if they are cogent and credible. 5) The laboratory reports in the present case are vague and ambiguous and, therefore, they cannot be relied upon to reach any specific conclusion regarding the incident. 6) The evidence regarding the actual incident, the testimonies of witnesses, the evidence connecting the vehicles and cartridges to the accused – Manu Sharma, 227
as well as his conduct after the incident prove his guilt beyond reasonable doubt. The High Court has analyzed all the evidence and arrived at the correct conclusion. 7) The public prosecutor is under a duty of disclosure under the Cr.P.C., Bar Council Rules and relevant principles of common law. Nevertheless, a violation of this duty does not necessarily vitiate the entire trial. A trial would only be vitiated if non-disclosure amounts to a material irregularity and causes irreversible prejudice to the accused. In the present case, no such prejudice was caused to the accused, and therefore the trial is not vitiated.
8) No prejudice had been caused to the right of the accused to fair trial and non-furnishing of the copy of one of the ballistic reports had not hampered the ends of justice. The right of the accused to disclosure has not received any set back in the facts and circumstances of the case. 9) The High Court has rightly convicted the other two accused, namely, Amardeep Singh Gill @ Tony Gill and Vikas Yadav after appreciation of the evidence of PWs 30 and 101.
228
10) Normally, the judgment/order should be set aside or affirmed as the case may be but preferably without offering any undesirable comments, disparaging remarks or indications which would impinge upon the dignity and respect of judicial system.
11) Every effort should be made by the print and electronic media to ensure that the distinction between trial by media and informative media should always be maintained. Trial by media should be avoided particularly, at a stage when the suspect is entitled to the constitutional protections. Invasion of his rights is bound to be held as impermissible.
s
also the media related portions where media is warned by the Highest Judiciary
mr Ram jethmalani India’s nbumero uno cousel of crimianl cases defended Manu sharma in apex court and attacked media for passing a judgement on a pending case.. and malafide reporting without appreciation of indian evidence act 1872..
Media related paras- where media was warned..
Mr. Ram Jethmalani, learned senior counsel for the appellant submitted that the appellant-Manu Sharma had been specifically targeted and maligned before and during the proceedings by the media, who proclaimed him as guilty despite even after his acquittal by the Trial Court. He took us through various news items that were published in English & Hindi dailies. He elaborated that “Justice should not only be 222
done, it should manifestly and undoubtedly be seen to be done.” This common law rule can not be ignored. 146) Cardozo, one of the great Judges of American Supreme Court in his “Nature of the Judicial Process” observed that the judges are subconsciously influenced by several forces. This Court has expressed a similar view in P.C. Sen In Re: AIR 1970 SC 1821 and Reliance Petrochemicals Ltd. v. Proprietors of Indian Express 1988 (4) SCC 592. 147) There is danger, of serious risk of prejudice if the media exercises an unrestricted and unregulated freedom such that it publishes photographs of the suspects or the accused before the identification parades are constituted or if the media publishes statements which out rightly hold the suspect or the accused guilty even before such an order has been passed by the Court.
148) Despite the significance of the print and electronic media in the present day, it is not only desirable but least that is expected of the persons at the helm of affairs in the field, to ensure that trial by media does not hamper fair investigation by the investigating agency and more importantly does not prejudice the right of defence of the accused in any manner 223
whatsoever. It will amount to travesty of justice if either of this causes impediments in the accepted judicious and fair investigation and trial.
149) In the present case, certain articles and news items appearing in the newspapers immediately after the date of occurrence, did cause certain confusion in the mind of public as to the description and number of the actual assailants/suspects. It is unfortunate that trial by media did, though to a very limited extent, affect the accused, but not tantamount to a prejudice which should weigh with the Court in taking any different view. The freedom of speech protected under Article 19 (1) (a) of the Constitution has to be carefully and cautiously used, so as to avoid interference in the administration of justice and leading to undesirable results in the matters sub judice before the Courts. 150) A Bench of this Court in the case of R.K. Anand v. Delhi High Court (2009) 8 SCC 106, clearly stated it would be a sad day for the court to employ the media for setting its own house in order and the media too would not relish the role of being the snoopers for the Court. Media should perform the acts of journalism and not as a special agency for the Court. 224
The impact of television and newspaper coverage on a person’s reputation by creating a widespread perception of guilt, regardless of any verdict in a Court of law. This will not be fair. Even in the case of M.P. Lohia v. State of W.B. & Anr. (2005) 2 SCC 686, the Court reiterated its earlier view that freedom of speech and expression sometimes may amount to interference with the administration of justice as the articles appearing in the media could be prejudicial, this should not be permitted.
151) Presumption of innocence of an accused is a legal presumption and should not be destroyed at the very threshold through the process of media trial and that too when the investigation is pending. In that event, it will be opposed to the very basic rule of law and would impinge upon the protection granted to an accused under Article 21 of the Constitution [Anukul Chandra Pradhan v. Union of India & Ors. (1996) 6 SCC 354]. It is essential for the maintenance of dignity of Courts and is one of the cardinal principles of rule of law in a free democratic country, that the criticism or even the reporting particularly, in sub judice matters must be 225
subjected to check and balances so as not to interfere with the administration of justice.
152) In the present case, various articles in the print media had appeared even during the pendency of the matter before the High Court which again gave rise to unnecessary controversies and apparently, had an effect of interfering with the administration of criminal justice. We would certainly caution all modes of media to extend their cooperation to ensure fair investigation, trial, defence of accused and non interference in the administration of justice in matters sub judice.
feb 2006- lower court verdict and he was ACQUITTED.
______________________________________________________
media and sabrina’s effort over this so called injustice by them- WP UNDER ART 226 OF COI BEFORE HON’BLE DELHI HIGH COURT
later part of 2006
matter was heard daily for 25 days and case was decided with CONVICTION for accuse.
________________________________________________________________
19 th APRIL 2010- Hon’ble Apex court in the appealed filed by the accused.. dismised the appeal… and judgement link and material para available to u are there above.
TRANSCRIPT- OF MANU SHARMA TAPED (CONFESSION TO POLICE.. but not aa legal evidence in eyes of Law)
Transcript:
“We decided to go to Qutab Colonnade,” Manu confessed to the police.
Manu: We reached at about 10:15 and there were a lot of people. A lot of crowd was there, to my surprise.
I went to the counter and asked how much a whiskey bottle is for. He said Rs 2,400. So I bought a coupon for Rs 2,400 and I was trying to get in.
At that point of time, there was some guy in a black T-shirt who gave the first drink. Inside the bar, there were at least three waiters behind the bar counter. There was Malini Ramani.
Police: Did you know Malini Ramani before?
Manu: No, sir. There was Jessica Lall, I did not know her name.
I was told even if you give a thousand bucks, I will not give a sip of wine and I said that we have got an arrangement there. I pulled out my pistol there.
Police: Which pistol?
Manu: It is 22/.2Z pistol made in Italy.
Police: When did you buy it?
Manu: Three or four months before.
Police: How much did you pay for this?
Manu: Sir, I have a license from Chandigarh and bought it from Ambala for about Rs 16,000 and I fired one shot in the air.
Police: Air?
Manu: Yes, that is inside the Colonade. So it went into the roof and nobody bothered, nobody moved. Then I pointed at Jessica and what I intended to do was I pointed slightly away from her so that I could see her hair, I wanted to generally shoot.
Police: What was the idea?
Manu: The idea at that time was to shoot in challenge. It was embarrassing to hear that even if I paid a thousand bucks I would not get a sip of drink. I pointed towards her a little and fired the shot. So I think I hit someone, I was just trying to see what had happened, when this lady comes up there.
Police: What type of lady?
Manu: Oldish, thin and she says you don’t worry and stay here and then I realised something had happened. Then I could hear people saying somebody has shot.
I knew I should move. I took a lift on scooter/motorcycle and I saw a little garden and sort of a dhaba and I put my pistol there. I took a hitch from a scooter, a Tata Safari and a tractor before I reached right in front of Tony’s house.
Alok and Vikas were all there by that time. When I inquired, they told me, “I think she is dead”. I said single gunshot, he said, “yes”. I said who is she – “Jessica Lall”. I said which hospital – they said we don’t know.
Manu: I was slightly more scared. I said where is my car? They said we did not have the key, we could not get it. I said I need to move it, Vikas.
Vikas said okay, we will get the car, you stay. So Vikas and Tony left me and then got the Safari back. I remembered all of a sudden that my pistol was not with me, I did not readily recollect the place this time.
Vikas and Tony and I went and retrieved the pistol. Vikas and I took the Tata Safari to his house, 15, Balwant Rai Mehta Lane. We reached in early morning hours and made a couple of calls to our family in Chandigarh”.
***
Those phone calls began an onslaught of political pressure and influence, which guaranteed Manu Sharma’s eventual acquittal. Today, Manu runs a chain of bars and restaurants in Chandigarh. But the confession confirms his guilt. Legal experts say that it is potentially explosive evidence. “You can use that evidence during the course of investigation for recovery of evidence, and if there is recovery based on that statement you can use it to that effect,” said Pinky Anand, lawyer, Supreme Court.
“The fact that it wasn’t used so far is what is worrying, but lets hope that it will lead the case in the right direction now and help us out,” said Sabrina Lall, Jessica Lall’s sister. What’s especially important is that the statements on CD is also incriminating for Delhi police, which has to explain why it wasn’t used the first time around.
Police: What was the idea?
Manu: The idea at that time was to shoot in challenge. It was embarrassing to hear that even if I paid a thousand bucks I would not get a sip of drink. I pointed towards her a little and fired the shot. So I think I hit someone, I was just trying to see what had happened, when this lady comes up there.
the above line appears in THE TRAILER OF THE MOVIE.. as u can see it was taken from ndtv tape…
Yes, Rooney, thank you very much for all your effort in bringing the facts to us. I am curious, though, about the court’s comments on the media reporting. They reprimanded them quite mildly, but was there any other effect on the media? I.e., were they officially warned, fined, etc.? If not, what impact will this ruling have on their continuing to report in an irresponsible manner on other cases (which in fact they are doing)?
Nope i guess they werent fined, but what u need to understand sm imo-
1. this new media with all this irresponsibility is creation of last decade.
2. this was the first case (if wrong i stand corrected ) wherein Jethmalan the defence lawyer took thme and argued against them. if any other case i am not aware.
3. so for first time Hon’ble Apex court history (me being a mere small observer and a law student) most of the times its a condemning and reprimand.
but now that as u say they continue in near future (read 4-5 years)
u would get a judgement with verdict giving guidelines on the issue how to conduct themselve are fine would be attracted.
ALSO ONE NEED TO UNDERSTAND how would supreme court fine in absence of legislation on this regard? unfortunately (again if i am wrong on law i stand corrected) in india we dont legislation on this regard. for eg fines u are asking cant be INTRODUCED BY COURT, theu have to come from parliament.
a) also for eg do u know about Vishakha guidelines? (rape victim case re workplace if i am not wrong)) its 1997 case wherein apex court gave guidelines regarding protection agains SEXUAL HARASSMENT IN WORK PLACE, no law was in place.. but because india was a membr to some international treaty, show flowing from thereon guidelines were created but only structure was given.. now if not followed what happens as ordinary citizens and companies cant be expected to follow verdict in companies.. legislation needs to be made.
and u wont believe legislation still not enacted, only recently few weeks ago bill was passed .. Protection of women at work place Bill 2010 something something !!
_________________________________________________________
so law making mechanism is a long process, and court cant punish in absence of Law! they need legislation.
HAVE U heard of UNIFORM CIVIL CODE?
shah bano case? 125 criminal procedure code maintainance?
UCC, supremcourt has directed time and again to be brought in this country, but central govt cant.. as i hope understand chaos that can be caused?
and Shah bano case u should know was very debatable point .. as Muslim women was given Maintainance under 125 crpc.. directly in violation of personal law of hers and whole india got erupted .. and a act was passed to nullify effect of that very Judgement!!
so in india Its very Difficult for Law to be made.. and it takes a long procedure.. and fight.. and great hard work and efficiency and support of members of parliament.. before a law is passed.. and
thus sometime would takje place before some proper law comes in place.
btw i thought u might like to read this.. how a central ministry notification declared big boss ( I GUESS DUE TO SUHAAG RAAT, OR PAMELA SOMETHING) and some serials after 11 slot.. challenged in Honb’ble Bombay High court.. and was STAYED
SO bottomline and in few words.. they have to take this at first warning.. and in nnear few years some channel would suffer.. and mostly it would be poor reporting and SC would take them to the grave imo (cant predicgt but thats how it would happen)
this media thing is also very powerful u must remember sm.. they are i hope u get it.
Yes, I’ve seen Chintuji and loved it. It is a wonderful satire on ‘stars’. Rishi Kapoor was as himself in the film and did a fantastic job. Some minor flaws which I always don’t think or talk about when the overall effect is extremely positive.
I thought it was quite wonderful, actually. The most authentic depiction of the middle class in years, one that is far removed from the now standard Hindi film universe. A must-see and easily among the most interesting Hindi films this years as far as I’m concerned.
And, quite predictably, most critics didn’t take well to some of the ‘serious’ turns the film takes at different points, some explicitly noting that it didn’t have the tongue-in-cheek quality of Khosla Ka Ghosla. Now I loved the latter and it may be a more accomplished film in terms of style than this one, but I thought this film worked superbly whenever it took those serious turns, taking a more sincere approach in depicting the absurdity the middle class faces in participating in the consumerist race. A moving little film.
The trailer I saw last week on the big screen was really interesting so much so that I would like to see this movie when it releases. Both Rani and Vidya were very impressive in the trailer
somehow not v interested in this theme..
also not keen to watch rani in ANY central avataar.
Why has vidya balan (post paa, ishqiya) accepted this part which looks like a secondaery supporting role to ranis—Personally found it a bit strange
I was originally looking forward to this Vidya movie. But the focus seems to be about Rani’s role as the journalist (which looks OTT) and not about Jessica and her sister as played by Vidya.
Somehow I have a fear in my mind that this may just disappoint.. IMO, the recent trailers havent lived up to the excitement created by the first trailer..
Raja Sen doesnt seem to be too kind to this one either, calling it amateurish masala..
exactly what I have been thinking about it, judging by some recent promos..
An Indian Murder Reverberates on Film
By ANDY WEBSTER
In 1999 Jessica Lal, a model tending bar at an elite nightspot in New Delhi, was shot dead by a customer who was refused a drink. A trial in 2006 acquitted the man, the son of a wealthy former government minister, but he was later found guilty by the Delhi High Court and sentenced to life imprisonment.
Even while acknowledging its fictional elements, Raj Kumar Gupta’s “No One Killed Jessica,” effectively recreates this case, “a milestone,” as a voice-over narration puts it, “in the history of a new India.”
Jessica’s bookish sister, Sabrina (Vidya Balan), is frustrated at the investigation, which is fraught with tarnished evidence and retracted testimony from bribed witnesses. A weary detective (a worthy Rajesh Sharma) is paid off to go easy on the accused (Mohammed Zeeshan Ayyub), and he hates himself for it. As her mother’s health collapses from the stress, an exhausted Sabrina abandons hope.
But then a brash television reporter, Meera Gaity (the throaty Bollywood goddess Rani Mukherjee, cursing up a storm and blazing with charisma), who had dismissed the case as mere celebrity scandal until the acquittal, takes up the cause over her male boss’s objections. Soon the public’s indignation manifests in a campaign of television exposés, text messages and candlelight vigils, and the case is reviewed.
Mr. Gupta (the topical thriller “Aamir”) indulges his affinity for politics overtly and covertly: in an opening montage a man jostles a woman on a bus; in a flashback Jessica defends Sabrina from sexual harassment on the street. As Sabrina, Ms. Balan submerges her beauty in unflattering T-shirts, eyeglasses and a sober ponytail, while Ms. Mukherjee’s character has no time either for her demanding boyfriend or her timid employer. Mumbai’s film culture isn’t spared, impugned in the spineless witness Vikram (Neil Bhoopalam), an aspiring actor who recants his story for the money.
“Is the price of life so cheap in our country?” asks an infuriated Meera. At a time when Indian officials are immersed in kickback scandals and violence against women remains endemic, “No One Killed Jessica” deserves to be seen — and heard.
November 18, 2010 at 8:50 AM
Looks good. Simpler in structure than Aamir. But great looking social-thriller / docudrama nevertheless.
November 18, 2010 at 8:55 AM
Trivedi’s music is another bonus…..sounds catchy!
November 18, 2010 at 10:19 AM
Lol akshay man how did u post it !! i have posted since evening ..
November 18, 2010 at 10:29 AM
@satyam (posting here as there reply not available )
cool dude
i was jus kidding with prazz.. so WHAT are ur thoughts on trailer and music??
November 19, 2010 at 12:38 AM
Haha all good Rooney
This trailer looks pretty good I thought….
November 18, 2010 at 11:57 PM
yo… its fdfs kind of movie for me.. also i would have winter vaca it would help
November 18, 2010 at 11:41 AM
The trailer looks good but a little too melodramatic.
Why is Rani in full makeup as a journalist? Vidya looks more like the journalist than Rani.
November 18, 2010 at 12:13 PM
At last a courtroom drama. Real too.
Good to see Rani back that too in a challenging role (after dil bole hadipa debacle). Vidya is suitably subdued but does seem to show pent up emotions.
Altogether, a promising film.
Liked the dialgoue with the man ‘on the chchat’.
I’m wondering whether one can reproduce the actual words from the courtroom.
November 18, 2010 at 12:37 PM
old gold.. i am not sure that would have been exact court room word.. this might be dramatised version.. also the movie isnt using true names
Manish bharadwaj
and diff name of PW 1..
interestingly.. i hope u get who those name refer and make ur own understanding as i am failing to get it..
November 18, 2010 at 5:21 PM
I didn’t wonder about the dialogues spoken in the trailer as being ‘real’ mksrooney.
It was just a general wondering in cases such as these which happen to be from real lfe happenings.
I’m not surprised that they are using different names though.
November 19, 2010 at 12:38 AM
I said JUSt the other week WHERE THE HELL ARE THE COURTROOM DRAMAS? ANd DRAMAS in general….
November 18, 2010 at 12:48 PM
I’ve not found this trailer particularly appealing.
November 18, 2010 at 1:00 PM
hmmm interesting..
November 18, 2010 at 2:45 PM
looks good, hopefully it’s not too ott and melodramatic. I find rani kind of annoying now.
What’s the deal with this case, it seems like i’ve been hearing about it for years. Is the case over? or is it still going on? last i heard was that the accused was found not guilty. From what I’ve read it seemed like it was pretty obvious that he was guilty, but got away due to power/influence/connections…It’s a shame if that’s true. Hopefully the movie sticks to the facts and is authentic.
November 18, 2010 at 2:47 PM
The accused has been proven guilty in the High Court. I believe a Supreme Court verdict is awaited. In the mean time, Manu Sharma, who’s the son of a very influential and wealthy politician (Congress) remains behind bars.
November 18, 2010 at 3:15 PM
Thanks for the info Saket. That’s good to know that he’s at least in prison right now. How long has this case been going on? Is it common for cases to drag on for so long?
November 18, 2010 at 3:21 PM
Very common (cases tend to move more quickly where the defendant is poor/can’t afford lawyers to pore over every detail, etc. That’s true in the US too, although even at the best of times the Indian judiciary’s backlog is of a wholly different order of magnitude). Yes Sharma is in jail but it is still sad, as absent a HUGE public outcry he would likely have gotten off (see: large number of other influential accused rapists and murderers who manage to get off).
November 18, 2010 at 3:22 PM
Aside: one weird thing about this film is that the case was/is SO high profile in India that far more people have followed the news stories on/coverage of it than will ever watch this movie!
November 19, 2010 at 12:26 AM
@ q bhai – i am sure MEDIA would givemore publicity to this film asd this was their victory in their own words to serve justice in this country.. though i feel they went higly overboard here.. but i guess it was tit for tat.. mechanism.
ndtv had released a recorded tape of Manu confessing crime and yup the matter is decided by apex court and i am posting the Judgement with brief para and links.. and also
the transcript of Ndtv of Manu sharma confession (but not allowed under indian evidence as (s. 25-30 ) says confession to police not a evidence in indian laws.
November 18, 2010 at 3:39 PM
You can judge the power of these people
http://www.expressindia.com/latest-news/Sheila-overrode-Home-Secys-advice-on-Manus-parole/617359/
November 19, 2010 at 12:14 AM
saket the case was decided by Hon’ble apex court please see my detailed comment below with the material para of THAT judgement.. and u would see he’s proved guilty. and appeal was dismissed, and i have added Apex Copurt’s remark on Media also.
(154 para judgement available to u on the link)
November 18, 2010 at 9:16 PM
So what evenif manu sharma is found guilty, last heard manu sharma was in controversy when he was found in pubs late nights and roaming freely. he gets released every second month that also for a period of a month or more. Last time he was released onthe pretext of his mother being ill and to support his family business though her mother was found inaugerating some function . Once he was released to attend his relative’s funeral that also for around month. Though media raised question many times over it but sheila dixit gave some lame excuse.his family is very powerful in delhi politics. Bhai log.. Everywhere in india only corruption and power rules.
November 19, 2010 at 12:20 AM
sir verdict is out LIFETIME IMPRISIONMENT is the verdict, already 6-7 months ago.. Supreme court is ceased with the matter, appeal was dismissed.
He is in Jail.. but agree the abov e parole controversy took place.
November 19, 2010 at 12:09 AM
@saket/q bhai/munna / sarvansh /r entz
EXCUSE ME guys VERDICT IS OUT AND CLEAR..19th APRIL THIS YEAR.. or else i would have been first one agsainst this film!! (he was out on parole for her grandmother health being bad.. recently thats it.)
official text of the judgement of Hon’ble Apex Court in india-
“154) In the light of the above discussion, we hold that the prosecution has established its case beyond doubt against the appellants and we are in agreement with the conclusion arrived at by the High Court, consequently, all the appeals are devoid of any merit and are accordingly dismissed.”
http://indiankanoon.org/doc/1515299/ummary of the conclusion those who dont want to read 154 paras-
153) Summary of our Conclusion:
1) The appellate Court has all the necessary powers to re- evaluate the evidence let in before the trial Court as well as the conclusions reached. It has a duty to specify the compelling and substantial reasons in case it reverses the order of acquittal passed by the trial Court. In the case on hand, the High Court by adhering to all the ingredients and by giving cogent and adequate reasons reversed the order of acquittal.
226
2) The presence of the accused at the scene of crime is proved through the ocular testimonies of PWs 1, 2, 6, 20, 23, 24 and 70, corroborated by Ex PW 12/D-I as well as 3 PCR calls Ex PW 11/A, B and C.
3) Phone calls made immediately after an incident to the police constitutes an FIR only when they are not vague and cryptic. Calls purely for the reason of getting the police to the scene of crime do not necessarily constitute the FIR. In the present case, the phone calls were vague and therefore could not be registered as the FIR. The FIR was properly lodged as per the statement of Shyan Munshi PW-2.
4) Delay in recording the statement of the witnesses do not necessarily discredit their testimonies. The court may rely on such testimonies if they are cogent and credible. 5) The laboratory reports in the present case are vague and ambiguous and, therefore, they cannot be relied upon to reach any specific conclusion regarding the incident. 6) The evidence regarding the actual incident, the testimonies of witnesses, the evidence connecting the vehicles and cartridges to the accused – Manu Sharma, 227
as well as his conduct after the incident prove his guilt beyond reasonable doubt. The High Court has analyzed all the evidence and arrived at the correct conclusion. 7) The public prosecutor is under a duty of disclosure under the Cr.P.C., Bar Council Rules and relevant principles of common law. Nevertheless, a violation of this duty does not necessarily vitiate the entire trial. A trial would only be vitiated if non-disclosure amounts to a material irregularity and causes irreversible prejudice to the accused. In the present case, no such prejudice was caused to the accused, and therefore the trial is not vitiated.
8) No prejudice had been caused to the right of the accused to fair trial and non-furnishing of the copy of one of the ballistic reports had not hampered the ends of justice. The right of the accused to disclosure has not received any set back in the facts and circumstances of the case. 9) The High Court has rightly convicted the other two accused, namely, Amardeep Singh Gill @ Tony Gill and Vikas Yadav after appreciation of the evidence of PWs 30 and 101.
228
10) Normally, the judgment/order should be set aside or affirmed as the case may be but preferably without offering any undesirable comments, disparaging remarks or indications which would impinge upon the dignity and respect of judicial system.
11) Every effort should be made by the print and electronic media to ensure that the distinction between trial by media and informative media should always be maintained. Trial by media should be avoided particularly, at a stage when the suspect is entitled to the constitutional protections. Invasion of his rights is bound to be held as impermissible.
s
also the media related portions where media is warned by the Highest Judiciary
November 19, 2010 at 12:12 AM
mr Ram jethmalani India’s nbumero uno cousel of crimianl cases defended Manu sharma in apex court and attacked media for passing a judgement on a pending case.. and malafide reporting without appreciation of indian evidence act 1872..
Media related paras- where media was warned..
Mr. Ram Jethmalani, learned senior counsel for the appellant submitted that the appellant-Manu Sharma had been specifically targeted and maligned before and during the proceedings by the media, who proclaimed him as guilty despite even after his acquittal by the Trial Court. He took us through various news items that were published in English & Hindi dailies. He elaborated that “Justice should not only be 222
done, it should manifestly and undoubtedly be seen to be done.” This common law rule can not be ignored. 146) Cardozo, one of the great Judges of American Supreme Court in his “Nature of the Judicial Process” observed that the judges are subconsciously influenced by several forces. This Court has expressed a similar view in P.C. Sen In Re: AIR 1970 SC 1821 and Reliance Petrochemicals Ltd. v. Proprietors of Indian Express 1988 (4) SCC 592. 147) There is danger, of serious risk of prejudice if the media exercises an unrestricted and unregulated freedom such that it publishes photographs of the suspects or the accused before the identification parades are constituted or if the media publishes statements which out rightly hold the suspect or the accused guilty even before such an order has been passed by the Court.
148) Despite the significance of the print and electronic media in the present day, it is not only desirable but least that is expected of the persons at the helm of affairs in the field, to ensure that trial by media does not hamper fair investigation by the investigating agency and more importantly does not prejudice the right of defence of the accused in any manner 223
whatsoever. It will amount to travesty of justice if either of this causes impediments in the accepted judicious and fair investigation and trial.
149) In the present case, certain articles and news items appearing in the newspapers immediately after the date of occurrence, did cause certain confusion in the mind of public as to the description and number of the actual assailants/suspects. It is unfortunate that trial by media did, though to a very limited extent, affect the accused, but not tantamount to a prejudice which should weigh with the Court in taking any different view. The freedom of speech protected under Article 19 (1) (a) of the Constitution has to be carefully and cautiously used, so as to avoid interference in the administration of justice and leading to undesirable results in the matters sub judice before the Courts. 150) A Bench of this Court in the case of R.K. Anand v. Delhi High Court (2009) 8 SCC 106, clearly stated it would be a sad day for the court to employ the media for setting its own house in order and the media too would not relish the role of being the snoopers for the Court. Media should perform the acts of journalism and not as a special agency for the Court. 224
The impact of television and newspaper coverage on a person’s reputation by creating a widespread perception of guilt, regardless of any verdict in a Court of law. This will not be fair. Even in the case of M.P. Lohia v. State of W.B. & Anr. (2005) 2 SCC 686, the Court reiterated its earlier view that freedom of speech and expression sometimes may amount to interference with the administration of justice as the articles appearing in the media could be prejudicial, this should not be permitted.
151) Presumption of innocence of an accused is a legal presumption and should not be destroyed at the very threshold through the process of media trial and that too when the investigation is pending. In that event, it will be opposed to the very basic rule of law and would impinge upon the protection granted to an accused under Article 21 of the Constitution [Anukul Chandra Pradhan v. Union of India & Ors. (1996) 6 SCC 354]. It is essential for the maintenance of dignity of Courts and is one of the cardinal principles of rule of law in a free democratic country, that the criticism or even the reporting particularly, in sub judice matters must be 225
subjected to check and balances so as not to interfere with the administration of justice.
152) In the present case, various articles in the print media had appeared even during the pendency of the matter before the High Court which again gave rise to unnecessary controversies and apparently, had an effect of interfering with the administration of criminal justice. We would certainly caution all modes of media to extend their cooperation to ensure fair investigation, trial, defence of accused and non interference in the administration of justice in matters sub judice.
November 19, 2010 at 11:13 AM
thanks rooney, good to know!
November 19, 2010 at 12:18 AM
@sarvanbsh -
1999- matter started.
feb 2006- lower court verdict and he was ACQUITTED.
______________________________________________________
media and sabrina’s effort over this so called injustice by them- WP UNDER ART 226 OF COI BEFORE HON’BLE DELHI HIGH COURT
later part of 2006
matter was heard daily for 25 days and case was decided with CONVICTION for accuse.
________________________________________________________________
19 th APRIL 2010- Hon’ble Apex court in the appealed filed by the accused.. dismised the appeal… and judgement link and material para available to u are there above.
November 19, 2010 at 12:28 AM
TRANSCRIPT- OF MANU SHARMA TAPED (CONFESSION TO POLICE.. but not aa legal evidence in eyes of Law)
Transcript:
“We decided to go to Qutab Colonnade,” Manu confessed to the police.
Manu: We reached at about 10:15 and there were a lot of people. A lot of crowd was there, to my surprise.
I went to the counter and asked how much a whiskey bottle is for. He said Rs 2,400. So I bought a coupon for Rs 2,400 and I was trying to get in.
At that point of time, there was some guy in a black T-shirt who gave the first drink. Inside the bar, there were at least three waiters behind the bar counter. There was Malini Ramani.
Police: Did you know Malini Ramani before?
Manu: No, sir. There was Jessica Lall, I did not know her name.
I was told even if you give a thousand bucks, I will not give a sip of wine and I said that we have got an arrangement there. I pulled out my pistol there.
Police: Which pistol?
Manu: It is 22/.2Z pistol made in Italy.
Police: When did you buy it?
Manu: Three or four months before.
Police: How much did you pay for this?
Manu: Sir, I have a license from Chandigarh and bought it from Ambala for about Rs 16,000 and I fired one shot in the air.
Police: Air?
Manu: Yes, that is inside the Colonade. So it went into the roof and nobody bothered, nobody moved. Then I pointed at Jessica and what I intended to do was I pointed slightly away from her so that I could see her hair, I wanted to generally shoot.
Police: What was the idea?
Manu: The idea at that time was to shoot in challenge. It was embarrassing to hear that even if I paid a thousand bucks I would not get a sip of drink. I pointed towards her a little and fired the shot. So I think I hit someone, I was just trying to see what had happened, when this lady comes up there.
Police: What type of lady?
Manu: Oldish, thin and she says you don’t worry and stay here and then I realised something had happened. Then I could hear people saying somebody has shot.
I knew I should move. I took a lift on scooter/motorcycle and I saw a little garden and sort of a dhaba and I put my pistol there. I took a hitch from a scooter, a Tata Safari and a tractor before I reached right in front of Tony’s house.
Alok and Vikas were all there by that time. When I inquired, they told me, “I think she is dead”. I said single gunshot, he said, “yes”. I said who is she – “Jessica Lall”. I said which hospital – they said we don’t know.
Manu: I was slightly more scared. I said where is my car? They said we did not have the key, we could not get it. I said I need to move it, Vikas.
Vikas said okay, we will get the car, you stay. So Vikas and Tony left me and then got the Safari back. I remembered all of a sudden that my pistol was not with me, I did not readily recollect the place this time.
Vikas and Tony and I went and retrieved the pistol. Vikas and I took the Tata Safari to his house, 15, Balwant Rai Mehta Lane. We reached in early morning hours and made a couple of calls to our family in Chandigarh”.
***
Those phone calls began an onslaught of political pressure and influence, which guaranteed Manu Sharma’s eventual acquittal. Today, Manu runs a chain of bars and restaurants in Chandigarh. But the confession confirms his guilt. Legal experts say that it is potentially explosive evidence. “You can use that evidence during the course of investigation for recovery of evidence, and if there is recovery based on that statement you can use it to that effect,” said Pinky Anand, lawyer, Supreme Court.
“The fact that it wasn’t used so far is what is worrying, but lets hope that it will lead the case in the right direction now and help us out,” said Sabrina Lall, Jessica Lall’s sister. What’s especially important is that the statements on CD is also incriminating for Delhi police, which has to explain why it wasn’t used the first time around.
Link for more -
http://www.indiantelevision.com/release/y2k6/oct/octrel4.htm
November 19, 2010 at 12:28 AM
Police: What was the idea?
Manu: The idea at that time was to shoot in challenge. It was embarrassing to hear that even if I paid a thousand bucks I would not get a sip of drink. I pointed towards her a little and fired the shot. So I think I hit someone, I was just trying to see what had happened, when this lady comes up there.
the above line appears in THE TRAILER OF THE MOVIE.. as u can see it was taken from ndtv tape…
November 19, 2010 at 1:54 AM
Thanks a lot of the all the info. rooney.
November 19, 2010 at 2:20 AM
Yes, Rooney, thank you very much for all your effort in bringing the facts to us. I am curious, though, about the court’s comments on the media reporting. They reprimanded them quite mildly, but was there any other effect on the media? I.e., were they officially warned, fined, etc.? If not, what impact will this ruling have on their continuing to report in an irresponsible manner on other cases (which in fact they are doing)?
November 19, 2010 at 3:20 AM
Nope i guess they werent fined, but what u need to understand sm imo-
1. this new media with all this irresponsibility is creation of last decade.
2. this was the first case (if wrong i stand corrected ) wherein Jethmalan the defence lawyer took thme and argued against them. if any other case i am not aware.
3. so for first time Hon’ble Apex court history (me being a mere small observer and a law student) most of the times its a condemning and reprimand.
but now that as u say they continue in near future (read 4-5 years)
u would get a judgement with verdict giving guidelines on the issue how to conduct themselve are fine would be attracted.
ALSO ONE NEED TO UNDERSTAND how would supreme court fine in absence of legislation on this regard? unfortunately (again if i am wrong on law i stand corrected) in india we dont legislation on this regard. for eg fines u are asking cant be INTRODUCED BY COURT, theu have to come from parliament.
a) also for eg do u know about Vishakha guidelines? (rape victim case re workplace if i am not wrong)) its 1997 case wherein apex court gave guidelines regarding protection agains SEXUAL HARASSMENT IN WORK PLACE, no law was in place.. but because india was a membr to some international treaty, show flowing from thereon guidelines were created but only structure was given.. now if not followed what happens as ordinary citizens and companies cant be expected to follow verdict in companies.. legislation needs to be made.
and u wont believe legislation still not enacted, only recently few weeks ago bill was passed .. Protection of women at work place Bill 2010 something something !!
_________________________________________________________
so law making mechanism is a long process, and court cant punish in absence of Law! they need legislation.
____________________________________________________________
another eg-
HAVE U heard of UNIFORM CIVIL CODE?
shah bano case? 125 criminal procedure code maintainance?
UCC, supremcourt has directed time and again to be brought in this country, but central govt cant.. as i hope understand chaos that can be caused?
and Shah bano case u should know was very debatable point .. as Muslim women was given Maintainance under 125 crpc.. directly in violation of personal law of hers and whole india got erupted .. and a act was passed to nullify effect of that very Judgement!!
___________________________________________________________
so in india Its very Difficult for Law to be made.. and it takes a long procedure.. and fight.. and great hard work and efficiency and support of members of parliament.. before a law is passed.. and
thus sometime would takje place before some proper law comes in place.
________________________________________________________
btw i thought u might like to read this.. how a central ministry notification declared big boss ( I GUESS DUE TO SUHAAG RAAT, OR PAMELA SOMETHING) and some serials after 11 slot.. challenged in Honb’ble Bombay High court.. and was STAYED
http://www.legallyindia.com/201011181530/Litigation/naik-paranjpe-gets-bigg-boss-out-of-late-night-back-to-prime-time
November 19, 2010 at 3:24 AM
SO bottomline and in few words.. they have to take this at first warning.. and in nnear few years some channel would suffer.. and mostly it would be poor reporting and SC would take them to the grave imo (cant predicgt but thats how it would happen)
this media thing is also very powerful u must remember sm.. they are i hope u get it.
November 21, 2010 at 8:47 AM
Thank you mksrooney. Very informative. I haven’t read all of it yet, but will do so asap.
November 20, 2010 at 11:58 PM
what a bizarre title for a film!
November 21, 2010 at 5:39 AM
Anyone seen the Rishi Kapoor film DO DOONI CHAAR or CHINTUJI?
November 21, 2010 at 8:45 AM
Yes, I’ve seen Chintuji and loved it. It is a wonderful satire on ‘stars’. Rishi Kapoor was as himself in the film and did a fantastic job. Some minor flaws which I always don’t think or talk about when the overall effect is extremely positive.
Haven’t seen the other one.
November 21, 2010 at 8:48 AM
http://satyamshot.wordpress.com/2010/09/13/do-dooni-char-trailer/#comment-73006
November 21, 2010 at 1:00 PM
I thought it was quite wonderful, actually. The most authentic depiction of the middle class in years, one that is far removed from the now standard Hindi film universe. A must-see and easily among the most interesting Hindi films this years as far as I’m concerned.
November 21, 2010 at 1:17 PM
.. this year as far as I’m concerned, I meant.
November 21, 2010 at 5:02 PM
Just got a copy of the film, am looking forward to watching it…
November 22, 2010 at 3:05 AM
thanks guys, most definetly will check DO DOONI CHAAR out in coming days!
November 21, 2010 at 1:14 PM
And, quite predictably, most critics didn’t take well to some of the ‘serious’ turns the film takes at different points, some explicitly noting that it didn’t have the tongue-in-cheek quality of Khosla Ka Ghosla. Now I loved the latter and it may be a more accomplished film in terms of style than this one, but I thought this film worked superbly whenever it took those serious turns, taking a more sincere approach in depicting the absurdity the middle class faces in participating in the consumerist race. A moving little film.
November 22, 2010 at 1:48 PM
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/entertainment/bollywood/news-interviews/Rani-teams-up-with-Aamir-again/articleshow/6969818.cms
Rani teams up with Aamir again
November 22, 2010 at 1:49 PM
That’s about the best news Rani could have received!
November 24, 2010 at 9:13 PM
The trailer I saw last week on the big screen was really interesting so much so that I would like to see this movie when it releases. Both Rani and Vidya were very impressive in the trailer
December 18, 2010 at 1:39 PM
somehow not v interested in this theme..
also not keen to watch rani in ANY central avataar.
Why has vidya balan (post paa, ishqiya) accepted this part which looks like a secondaery supporting role to ranis—Personally found it a bit strange
December 18, 2010 at 2:09 PM
I was originally looking forward to this Vidya movie. But the focus seems to be about Rani’s role as the journalist (which looks OTT) and not about Jessica and her sister as played by Vidya.
December 31, 2010 at 6:41 AM
January 4, 2011 at 11:57 AM
Somehow I have a fear in my mind that this may just disappoint.. IMO, the recent trailers havent lived up to the excitement created by the first trailer..
Though I hope I am proved wrong
January 5, 2011 at 4:02 PM
Taran’s movie review 4/5
http://www.bollywoodhungama.com/movies/review/13451/index.html
January 5, 2011 at 4:35 PM
twitter word from medis who have seen this seems pretty positive for this too
January 6, 2011 at 8:55 AM
Rediff Review
http://www.rediff.com/movies/report/no-one-killed-jessica-review/20110106.htm
January 6, 2011 at 10:02 AM
pretty weird review.
Raja Sen doesnt seem to be too kind to this one either, calling it amateurish masala..
exactly what I have been thinking about it, judging by some recent promos..
January 6, 2011 at 10:06 AM
TOI Review
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/entertainment/bollywood/news-interviews/Movie-Review-No-One-Killed-Jessica-/articleshow/7229288.cms
January 11, 2011 at 7:18 AM
NY Times:
An Indian Murder Reverberates on Film
By ANDY WEBSTER
In 1999 Jessica Lal, a model tending bar at an elite nightspot in New Delhi, was shot dead by a customer who was refused a drink. A trial in 2006 acquitted the man, the son of a wealthy former government minister, but he was later found guilty by the Delhi High Court and sentenced to life imprisonment.
Even while acknowledging its fictional elements, Raj Kumar Gupta’s “No One Killed Jessica,” effectively recreates this case, “a milestone,” as a voice-over narration puts it, “in the history of a new India.”
Jessica’s bookish sister, Sabrina (Vidya Balan), is frustrated at the investigation, which is fraught with tarnished evidence and retracted testimony from bribed witnesses. A weary detective (a worthy Rajesh Sharma) is paid off to go easy on the accused (Mohammed Zeeshan Ayyub), and he hates himself for it. As her mother’s health collapses from the stress, an exhausted Sabrina abandons hope.
But then a brash television reporter, Meera Gaity (the throaty Bollywood goddess Rani Mukherjee, cursing up a storm and blazing with charisma), who had dismissed the case as mere celebrity scandal until the acquittal, takes up the cause over her male boss’s objections. Soon the public’s indignation manifests in a campaign of television exposés, text messages and candlelight vigils, and the case is reviewed.
Mr. Gupta (the topical thriller “Aamir”) indulges his affinity for politics overtly and covertly: in an opening montage a man jostles a woman on a bus; in a flashback Jessica defends Sabrina from sexual harassment on the street. As Sabrina, Ms. Balan submerges her beauty in unflattering T-shirts, eyeglasses and a sober ponytail, while Ms. Mukherjee’s character has no time either for her demanding boyfriend or her timid employer. Mumbai’s film culture isn’t spared, impugned in the spineless witness Vikram (Neil Bhoopalam), an aspiring actor who recants his story for the money.
“Is the price of life so cheap in our country?” asks an infuriated Meera. At a time when Indian officials are immersed in kickback scandals and violence against women remains endemic, “No One Killed Jessica” deserves to be seen — and heard.
January 28, 2011 at 7:03 PM
http://www.indianexpress.com/news/no-one-killed-jessica-but-what-about-bina/741346/0