Using your phone's internet browser
go to:  qna.rediff.com
Click and drag this link to
the Home icon in your browser.
Q.

We have two lines of thought emerging.
1.No lawyer should represent Kasab in the court.
2.Every person has the right to defend and seek legal counsel to fight his case.
Friends,where do you fit in,in this?Please share your opinion.

Asked by vinod, 17 Dec '08 08:53 am
  Invite a friend  |  
  Save  |  
 Earn 10 points for answering
Answer this question  Earn 10 points for answering    
4000 characters remaining  
  
    
Keep me signed inNew User? Sign up

Answers (12)

 
1.

There are two aspects to this Qn, one where we are swayed by emotions and the second one seeing it from the Law of the land. Every society is governed by a set of laws, which infact are retraining factors that makes sure the people governed by the same are forced to follow a set of rules whether they like it or not. Which one do we choose? Do we make an exception for one only? Can we do that, without loosing the sense of civility that we or for that matter any civilised nation claims that we uphold? Can we leave everything to people's justice? If we do that, what are the consequences of such an action? Who will be the judges and who all would be judged? Look around our own country itself? Every kind of crime takes place. Most of them are justified by the killers for reasons which they feel fully justified in doing that. Of course, in this I do not include the murders committed after rapes, for gain or in the process of committing a crime. I am talking about the revenge killings, the ca ...more
Answered by Omega, 17 Dec '08 04:17 pm

 
  
Report abuse
Useful
 (3)
Not Useful
 (0)
Your vote on this answer has already been received
2.

Although personally i think no lawyer shud represent Kasab and instead swift and immediate justice in the form of death is only justice he deserves..... but at the same time i also feel he deserves to be heard....because he is a mere pawn in the hands of unseen powers..... why shoot the messenger!!!!
Our legal system is such that....even with known evidence justice is delayed... Afsal of Dec 13th...being an indian and not answerable to the international pressure is still alive while the legal wrangling, accusations and counter-accusations continues.... he is only wasting tax payers money and his being alive does not in any way assuage the loss of the families who lost their dear ones.
There is no point in haggling over whether legal aid shud be given or not.... more important is whether the justice will be fair and be expedited.....
Answered by sumitha, 17 Dec '08 05:11 pm

 
  
Report abuse
Useful
 (2)
Not Useful
 (0)
Your vote on this answer has already been received
3.

We don't have to represent Kasab. He is anti human. So I feel ,He should begiven to public for furthur treatment with his family at Colaba /CST/ India Gate ..just any where.But , This Q has contradictory statements. It is on for the Government, that he gets a fair trail, the govt. would consider legal counsel. It is the constitution, we have to defend. Hence, he must be given a legal counsel. Since he has been caught actively in terrorist attack, he would get what he deserves. So, I think, everyone would let the constitutional process take place.
Answered by prabhat kumar kumar, 17 Dec '08 09:03 am

 
  
Report abuse
Useful
 (2)
Not Useful
 (0)
Your vote on this answer has already been received
4.

Let Kasab defend himself.
Answered by sankaran subbiah, 19 Dec '08 07:27 pm

 
  
Report abuse
Useful
 (1)
Not Useful
 (0)
Your vote on this answer has already been received
5.

This matter is surprisingly with wide publicity 1)no lawyer should represent as humanity says-he deserves hanged till death --Wht process left as he was caught red handed after killing so many lives?Why does he need legal aid where entire world knows his inhuman act--he is a real culprit--2)every person is right to defend--but not terrorist --legal aid is given to a person who feels that he is wrongly implicated and that he cannot afford legal defense..it is simply waste of time,money,food and security for such cunning fellows --its time to awake and set new defination against such heinous activity no longer in future!!
Answered by himanshu sharma, 18 Dec '08 12:04 am

 
  
Report abuse
Useful
 (1)
Not Useful
 (0)
Your vote on this answer has already been received
6.

YES .you are right partly, but,with the existing legal system we will be sure to be disappointed with the trial,I must agree with MR.Arun jaitly that a special law must be needed to quickly prosecute terror cases.he opines,that the changes made in the unlawful Activities(prevention) Act did not include admissibility of made to police,which was viewed lacuna.
Answered by venkatesaldevarajan, 17 Dec '08 10:44 am

 
  
Report abuse
Useful
 (1)
Not Useful
 (0)
Your vote on this answer has already been received
7.

Why cant the government of India be penalized for it couldnt save so many innocent lives in these attacks?
Answered by Kamal, 17 Dec '08 10:05 am

 
  
Report abuse
Useful
 (1)
Not Useful
 (0)
Your vote on this answer has already been received
8.

After blaming BJP and NDA for more than four years on the issue of POTA, the UPA government has in the eleventh hour of their tenure has realized their guilt and moved a bill to amend the law to make it hard to deal with terrorists. But only the time will tell whether they are still serious to put their plan into action, whether their amended laws will be put into action by executive body in true spirit and whether they are actually able to create a real fear in the minds of terrorists to stop or at least reduce terror attacks, not only from foreign based terrorists but also from their evil brothers acting from within the country in various names commonly called as Naxalites or Extremists.

UPA government on home front has failed completely to stop spreading of evil network by Naxilites in every nook and corner of the country only because some of their brothers sitting in political arena are providing patronage to such Naxal groups in the name of social welfare or due to political co ...more
Answered by Danendra Jain, 17 Dec '08 09:54 am

 
  
Report abuse
Useful
 (1)
Not Useful
 (0)
Your vote on this answer has already been received
9.

The second, one, because i think every one deserve to give them a benefit of doubt, and we should find every one not guilty, till it proves otherwise
Answered by ramani, 17 Dec '08 08:58 am

 
  
Report abuse
Useful
 (1)
Not Useful
 (0)
Your vote on this answer has already been received
10.

I support point no.1. Because human rights is for humans. I am not considering them as humans.
Answered by Chandramohan Palaniswamy, 17 Dec '08 08:56 am

 
  
Report abuse
Useful
 (1)
Not Useful
 (0)
Your vote on this answer has already been received
Previous

Ask a Question

Get answers from the community

600 characters remaining

Related Answer

Q.
A

Yes you are right in generic terms. Any trend of appreciation or depreciation will have pros and cons for different sections of businesses and people...more

Answered by NASAman