ASG: Milords had this been physical hearing, I would have located them, it is difficult during virtual hearing.
All Laugh.
#BombayHighCourt begins hearing the plea of Lawyers Collective challenging the summons issued by ED for appearance of Sr Adv Anand Grover before them in the capacity of the trustee of the NGO.
@LCHIVWRI
@IJaising
@dir_ed
ASG: Milords had this been physical hearing, I would have located them, it is difficult during virtual hearing.
All Laugh.
Sr Adv Amit Desai asks the court to note certain facts from the plea.
ASG: Milords the petitioner cannot have a choice on the investigation. This investigation is at preliminary stage. I am only talking about recording of statement.
You were not there in a previous hearing, Mr. Ponda was there and Ms Gonsalves was there for CBI.
CBI had made a statement that they will complete investigation in a certain time.
Investigation officers have full liberty to conduct their investigation.
We will hear your matter in first week of January, 2021.
Court: What we are saying is that whatever date you fix for recording their statement, just do it after January 6.
I am willing to send my officers for recording statement if they cannot come to Delhi.
I am also saying that they are asking me to bring the documents, I am only saying I will send the documents
Desai gets disconnected from the call.
Court: Mr. Singh we will take this matter on December 22. Now time is over.
More from Bar & Bench
More from Law
There is a now-relevant parallel here to the difference here between matters before a judge & matters before a jury. Judges are far more reluctant to strike testimony or evidence if they are the only recipients of it, with the theory being that they are really smart about ...
law stuff & will know what they can & can't consider. For instance, there is a long-held rule that a fact witness can't make legal arguments, only a lawyer. So what will happen in a motion for summary judgment, where the entire proceeding is on paper, will play out like this:
1) Defendant makes a motion for summary judgment. It includes a sworn declaration from some fact witness.
2) The declaration includes all sorts of legal arguments about why the defendant should win. Often the declaration includes arguments the brief didn't even make.
Defendants (especially DOJ-represented ones) often do this to get around the word or page-limits placed on briefs.
3) Plaintiff moves to strike the declaration for its inclusion of inadmissible legal arguments.
4) Judge denies the motion to strike, on the grounds that a ...
judge is a sophisticated consumer of evidence & can choose what to consider & what to ignore, unlike a jury.
The legal fiction behind this impeachment exception is that Senators are also smart enough to know what to listen to & what to ignore. Now, that may not be ACCURATE, ...
To the extent that precedents matter in this trial, when hearsay has been challenged in past trials, it's been admitted if it's probative. And it's been noted that senators aren't *regular* jurors, but rather people of learning who can figure on their own how to weigh evidence.
— Ira Goldman \U0001f986\U0001f986\U0001f986 (@KDbyProxy) January 24, 2020
law stuff & will know what they can & can't consider. For instance, there is a long-held rule that a fact witness can't make legal arguments, only a lawyer. So what will happen in a motion for summary judgment, where the entire proceeding is on paper, will play out like this:
1) Defendant makes a motion for summary judgment. It includes a sworn declaration from some fact witness.
2) The declaration includes all sorts of legal arguments about why the defendant should win. Often the declaration includes arguments the brief didn't even make.
Defendants (especially DOJ-represented ones) often do this to get around the word or page-limits placed on briefs.
3) Plaintiff moves to strike the declaration for its inclusion of inadmissible legal arguments.
4) Judge denies the motion to strike, on the grounds that a ...
judge is a sophisticated consumer of evidence & can choose what to consider & what to ignore, unlike a jury.
The legal fiction behind this impeachment exception is that Senators are also smart enough to know what to listen to & what to ignore. Now, that may not be ACCURATE, ...
The Supremacy Of The Shari’a- A Thread 🧵
The Shari'a Law has been a subject of inequitable prejudice for a long time, which we already know is false & illogical.
However, as long as such claims are being made- we will have to falsify 'em.😏
Let's debunk all the myths.
Harvard Economists point out how eradication of poverty in secular states is one of the pressing issues academics face.
In fact, around a billion people live in extreme poverty conditions under the notion of secularism.
https://t.co/gVp2jRtjqU
https://t.co/oZELY0BFrd
Contrary to secularism-Islam was extremely triumphant in this regard.
The Shari'a states successfully eradicated poverty by creation of a welfare society & the institutionalization of obligatory charity.
https://t.co/5xpQkQ6ZQb
https://t.co/KH1sl1omB5
https://t.co/38ak5CUK1L
A logical outcome of 0% poverty is 0% crime rates, as criminologists point out.
This can be explained by the theory of Synnomie, which explains 0% crime rates & ideal social order under the Shari'a.
https://t.co/QwtLB6xEFW
https://t.co/HskBa5qy4P
https://t.co/mklS6BIOL0
The Shari'a Law has been a subject of inequitable prejudice for a long time, which we already know is false & illogical.
However, as long as such claims are being made- we will have to falsify 'em.😏
Let's debunk all the myths.
Harvard Economists point out how eradication of poverty in secular states is one of the pressing issues academics face.
In fact, around a billion people live in extreme poverty conditions under the notion of secularism.
https://t.co/gVp2jRtjqU
https://t.co/oZELY0BFrd
Contrary to secularism-Islam was extremely triumphant in this regard.
The Shari'a states successfully eradicated poverty by creation of a welfare society & the institutionalization of obligatory charity.
https://t.co/5xpQkQ6ZQb
https://t.co/KH1sl1omB5
https://t.co/38ak5CUK1L
A logical outcome of 0% poverty is 0% crime rates, as criminologists point out.
This can be explained by the theory of Synnomie, which explains 0% crime rates & ideal social order under the Shari'a.
https://t.co/QwtLB6xEFW
https://t.co/HskBa5qy4P
https://t.co/mklS6BIOL0
