Plagiarism Scan Report: Plagiarism Unique Plagiarized Sentences Unique Sentences

PLAGIARISM SCAN REPORT
Words 849 Date August 03,2020
Characters 5110 Exclude Url
5% 95% 2 36
Plagiarism Unique Plagiarized Unique Sentences
Sentences
Content Checked For Plagiarism
The Right to a fair trial is an basic right in all countries respecting the rule of law. It is clearly proclaimed in Article Ten of the
Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the Sixth Amendment of the US Constitution, Indian constitution and Article Six of the
European Convention of Human Rights, also as numerous other constitutions and declarations throughout all the countries.
“The justice system itself loses credibility” . The required ingredients for a fair and just civil trial must include a competent,
neutral and detached as well as unbiased judge (an independent judge); the absence of any intimidation of witnesses and
ideally, an equal weight of arms, i.e. a level playing field in terms of legal representation, such as a right to legal aid and advise
for criminal defendants. In order to dodge all possible challenges to the legal nature of the standards employed in evaluating
the fairness of a trial and justice, monitors should refer to norms of undisputedly legal origin. These are: (i) The laws of the
country during in which the trial is being held; (ii) The human rights treaties to which that country may be a party, and (iii)
“Norms of customary International law” . An important aspect for free of charge and fair trial is independent and impartial
Judiciary capable of ensuring fair trial proceedings isn’t only of importance to the rights and interests of citizens. Indian
constitution consists of several provisions so as to make sure provide the citizens with free and fair trial. The first important
thing is that the Art 20 of the constitution of India which provides right to a private to to not be witness against itself. Again
this text provides an individual the safeguard to not be punished twice for an equivalent offence. Similarly this text provides
that nobody shall be punished with the offence quite that prescribed within the law at the time of occurrence of the crime.
The Supreme Court within the case of Nandany Satpaty considered the parameters of sec. 161(2) of the CrPC and therefore
the scope and ambit of Art 20(3) of the constitution. Court held that Section 161 enables the police to look at the accused
during investigation. “The prohibitive sweep of Article 20(3) goes back to the police officer in charge interrogation not, as
contended commencing in court only”. Similarly there are several other provisions in several statues which put a check on the
investigating power of the police and provides right to the overall public in order that there shouldn't be infringement of a
private rights. The first and foremost is that the non- recognition of the statement given by a private before the police during
the time of interrogation. Briefly meaning statement given by the individual before the police while the police had no evidently
value. Secondly, there's express bar on the police or the investigating agency to urge the knowledge through any illegal means
like coercion, physical or mental torture etc. supreme court and different high courts have already held that if any evidence
has been received either through torture or any illegal means then that evidence will haven't any evidence value within the
eye of law. Thirdly, it had been as long as the individual arrested by the police or any investigating officer must be produced
before the magistrate within 24 hours of his arrest. Fourthly, an individual should have immediate recourse to his lawyer so
on to get legal advice from his layer. Similarly a duty have been sew the state so as order to provide free legal aid to those
people that can’t avail the services of lawyer on their own . At the similar time code of criminal procedure doesn’t confer the
power to investigate on every police officer. “According to Sec. 156 only an officer- in – charge of a police station is empowered
to investigate of the FIR” . “As noted by the Human Rights Committee generally Comment No. 13,” the principle of presumption
of innocence means that:-- “the burden of proof of the charge is on the prosecution and therefore the accused has the benefit
of doubt.” No guilt are often presumed until the charge has been proved beyond reasonable doubt. “Further, the
presumption of innocence signifies a right to be treated in accordance with this principle.” “It is, therefore, a duty for all public
authorities to refrain from prejudging the result of a trial”. The right to presumption of innocence may be a right which, like
other rights contained within the Convention, “must be interpreted in such a way as to guarantee rights which are practical
and effective as against to theoretical and illusory” Thus we found that there are some provisions made for free of charge and
fair trial of a private. But watching the general situation we discover that the powers of the police and other investigating
agencies are comparatively significantly taking into the account of provision of just and fair trial. Therefore the necessity of the
agencies are comparatively significantly taking into the account of provision of just and fair trial. Therefore the necessity of the
hour is to revamp the general the entire situation in order that the system prevalent becomes far more people friendly.
Sources Similarity
Random Thoughts: The Right to a fair trial

the essential ingredients for a fair and just civil trial must include a competent, neutral and detached judge
(an independent judge); the absence of any intimidation of witnesses and ideally, an equal weight of arms 10%
i.e. a level playing field in terms of legal representation, such as a right to counsel for...
http://kelimage.blogspot.com/2006/09/right-to-fair-trial.html
So what is "not guilty", really? | Yahoo Answers

Further, the presumption of. innocence implies a right to be treated in accordance with this principle. It. is,
therefore, a duty for all public authorities to refrain from prejudging the.I guess my real question is what 3%
should the public at large do with a verdict of "not guilty"?
https://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20130715170925AAG4ZZg

Plagiarism Scan Report: Plagiarism Unique Plagiarized Sentences Unique Sentences

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Plagiarism Scan Report: Plagiarism Unique Plagiarized Sentences Unique Sentences

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Plagiarism Scan Report: Plagiarism Unique Plagiarized Sentences Unique Sentences

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

PLAGIARISM SCAN REPORT

Words 849 Date August 03,2020

Characters 5110 Exclude Url

Random Thoughts: The Right to a fair trial

So what is "not guilty", really? | Yahoo Answers

You might also like