Back
COURT OF APPEAL PUTRAJAYA
BHAVANASH SHARMA GURCHARAN SINGH SHARMA – Appellant
Versus
JAGMOHAN SINGH SANDHU & ANOTHER APPEAL – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. overview of the appeals and parties involved. (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. background and procedural history of the impugned witness statement. (Para 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11) |
| 3. findings of the sessions court and high court. (Para 12 , 13) |
| 4. ethical considerations regarding witness statements. (Para 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20) |
| 5. importance of verifying witness statements to prevent contempt. (Para 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 , 25 , 26 , 27 , 28 , 29) |
| 6. conclusion on the sessions court's dismissal of the contempt application. (Para 30 , 31) |
| 7. analysis of the high court's ruling on appealability. (Para 32 , 33 , 34 , 35 , 36 , 37) |
| 8. court's decision to allow the appeal and reverse previous judgments. (Para 39) |
| 9. orders regarding costs and remittance for contempt proceedings. (Para 40 , 41) |
Background Facts
[1] There are two appeals before us. These two appeals revolve around an unsigned witness statement of one, Mr David Allen Martinez ("impugned WS") which was filed by the Respondent (via the Respondent's solicitors, Messrs Richard Talalla & Harun) without ever consulting or even meeting Mr David Allen Martinez ("Allen Martinez") on 28 February 2020. The Re
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
