Post by Thoithoi O'Cottage on Mar 15, 2014 6:38:58 GMT 5.5
Oja Somorjit Yengkhom, I've a query needing your expert comment and analysis.
Let’s imagine a scenario. This is just skeletal, not a detailed, comprehensive one. However, the most important pieces of information are provided here. When any need arises, I will supply more information (if possible), perhaps alternative sets of information, so that there can be multiple number of scenarios. However, let's assume that nobody knows the details of the incident leading to the death. At the same time I would expect you to imagine scenarios (but if you suppose scenarios, please state them so) as you think fit to enlighten us about what twist and turns the case may take depending on several alternative facts or contrafactual scenarios.
Let’s imagine a scenario. This is just skeletal, not a detailed, comprehensive one. However, the most important pieces of information are provided here. When any need arises, I will supply more information (if possible), perhaps alternative sets of information, so that there can be multiple number of scenarios. However, let's assume that nobody knows the details of the incident leading to the death. At the same time I would expect you to imagine scenarios (but if you suppose scenarios, please state them so) as you think fit to enlighten us about what twist and turns the case may take depending on several alternative facts or contrafactual scenarios.
Keywords: lynch mob, mob rule, mob justice, mob madness, mob legal responsibility
Two persons, A and B, have an argument in a public place. People around get interested in the topic and they start to gather around the two persons. B is quite radical in his views and most of the people get themselves involved in the argument, siding with A against B. A gets encouraged, and the argumentation becomes vitriolic, and something he says provokes B into an outburst, developing into a scuffle in which they exchange quite a few fist-blows. Some of the people who are biased (for ideological or sectional reasons) for A and against B get themselves bloody by joining the scuffle and B dies.
A is arrested, but none of the people who joined the scuffle and caused B’s death could be traced and arrested. A is the only traceable accused. He was clearly there, as one of the two persons who initiated the argument that turned into a scuffle. He is not solely responsible for the death, which was due to a mob action. Moreover, his history does not show anything that can cause legal prejudice against him, though nobody will possibly commit a crime for the second time without having committed a first. However, in the absence of other people, he is the only person responsible, at least partially.
In this main scenario, how culpable is A under Indian law, and what may be the appropriate punishment for his “crime”, at the severest? Is there no hope of his ever getting acquitted?
A is arrested, but none of the people who joined the scuffle and caused B’s death could be traced and arrested. A is the only traceable accused. He was clearly there, as one of the two persons who initiated the argument that turned into a scuffle. He is not solely responsible for the death, which was due to a mob action. Moreover, his history does not show anything that can cause legal prejudice against him, though nobody will possibly commit a crime for the second time without having committed a first. However, in the absence of other people, he is the only person responsible, at least partially.
In this main scenario, how culpable is A under Indian law, and what may be the appropriate punishment for his “crime”, at the severest? Is there no hope of his ever getting acquitted?