Crimes or criminal cases are considered offenses against the state, or society as a whole. That means that even though one person might murder another person, murder itself is considered an offense to everyone in society. Accordingly, crimes against the state are prosecuted by the state, and the prosecutor (not the victim) files the case in court as a representative of the state. If it were a civil case, then the wronged party would file the case.
Elements invovled into the crime
Generally, two elements are required in order to find a person guilty of a crime: an overt criminal act and criminal intent. The requirement of an Overt Act is fulfilled when the defendant purposely, knowingly, or recklessly does something prohibited by law. An act is purposeful when a person holds a conscious objective to engage in certain conduct or to cause a particular result. To act knowingly means to do so voluntarilyand deliberately, and not owing to mistake or some other innocent reason. An act is reckless when a person knows of an unjustifiable risk and consciously disregards it.
Some crimes require a criminal Intent. Where specific criminal intent is an element of a crime, it must be proved by the prosecution as an independent fact. For example, Robbery is the taking of property from another’s presence by force or threat of force. The intent element is fulfilled only by evidence showing that the defendant specifically intended to steal the property. Unlike general intent, specific intent may notbe inferred from the commission of the unlawful act. Examples of specificintent crimes are solicitation, attempt, conspiracy, first degree premeditated murder, assault, Larceny, robbery, burglary, forgery, false pretense, and Embezzlement.
Role of a senior advocate in a criminal case
All the above , when person face the trial under a criminal case, he tried his best to proof innocent himself before the court but any how sometimes person hold guilty by the court even he was innocent but because of that fact and evidence was against him. It happened many times in the history of the judiciary that when a person convicted by the lower court and after that acquittal by the higher court because of the reason that in higher court argument address by an advocate in the favour of his client on the law point which was ignore/not consider by the lower courts and in the most of cases like that in higher court senior advocate address the argument before the bench ( court).
Major difference between lower courts and high courts
The major difference between the lowers courts and higher courts is, lower courts always seen the facts and evidence and according to that courts have to decide the matter and pronounce the order. But on the other hand, higher court have to see some other things including the fact and evidence that lower court follow the proper procedure at the time of declaring the person hold guilty, lower court appreciate the all evidence or not, higher court also have to see the procedures follow by the investigation agency were the as per law or not and many more others things like intention, aim, motive behind the offence consider by the high court.
When a senior advocate assist the high court in case then result must be favour in the appellant/applicant.
The views & opinions expressed herein are done with a view to make law more understandable to the layman, law students & the junior members of the bar. This should not be construed as legal advise or opinion. As per the rules of the Bar Council of India, we are not permitted to solicit work and advertise.
The user acknowledges the following: * there has been no advertisement, personal communication, solicitation, invitation or inducement of any sort whatsoever from us or any of our members to solicit any work through this website.
We're not around right now. But you can send us an email and we'll get back to you, asap.