Talk:K. M. Nanavati v. State of Maharashtra

K. M. Nanavati v. State of Maharashtra received a peer review by Wikipedia editors, which is now archived. It may contain ideas you can use to improve this article.

A fact from K. M. Nanavati v. State of Maharashtra appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 20 October 2005. The text of the entry was as follows:

Did you know... that the 1959 court case K. M. Nanavati vs. State of Maharashtra was the last jury trial ever held in India?

A record of the entry may be seen at Wikipedia:Recent additions/2005/October.

Wikipedia

India Mid‑importance

	India portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject India, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of India-related topics. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page.IndiaWikipedia:WikiProject IndiaTemplate:WikiProject IndiaIndia articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article was last assessed in March 2012.

Law Low‑importance

	Law portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Law, an attempt at providing a comprehensive, standardised, pan-jurisdictional and up-to-date resource for the legal field and the subjects encompassed by it.LawWikipedia:WikiProject LawTemplate:WikiProject Lawlaw articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Info box on the RHS

Is this following a different template? But it seems off compared to some of the other info-boxes. Please can someone check this. --Csathya (talk) 17:59, 30 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Why "wrongly convicted" is so POV....

While HT's and Sethi's versions may both state that he is wrongly convicted, the "wrongly" would still be POV because - the court or a higher court has not reversed its judgment; pardon implies that the guilt still stands but punishment is revoked due to humanitarian reasons or otherwise good conduct. We don't say Mahatma Gandhi was wrongly arrested. Similarly, while Khushwant Singh and several others hold that Indira Gandhi was wrongly indicted by the Allahabad High Court, the same doen't get figured in her article. Or a way out would be to say that in what was considered to be a wrong conviction by many. In those days, the economic context was different and economic offences wrt imports were punished heavily (by today's standards). --Gurubrahma 14:49, 17 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I hope the current wording now is better. See [1] & [2] for the summary of that case. --Pamri • Talk 15:16, 17 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

It is perfect now. I did not know full details of the other case before. Thanks a ton!! --Gurubrahma 15:54, 17 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Next featured case on Portal:Law

I have nominated this case to be the next featured case on Portal:Law, I have begun the discussion on the talk page there. BD2412 ^talk 04:07, 20 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

High court image

Breaks the flow. I get that the edit summary for the inclusion of the image says it's there to provide a break, but just felt it was looking odd. Am fiddling with the size to see if I can make it look better. Saksham 13:13, 8 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Really "The" Deciding Case for Juries?

I am still really curious to know if this was THE deciding case to abolish juries? Is the Indian legal system that swayed by a single case? Gautam ^Discuss 02:34, 25 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Infobox mistake?

Why does infobox heading say "Shray Prem vs. State of Maharashtra"? ★Saurabh P. | ☎ talk 11:15, 18 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Bias

This article is not neutral at all in either the verdict of the case or the subsequent fact that juries were abolished. The facts are not presented as they are instead the page has been (perhaps subtally in the deluded mind of the author) overtly pushing a pnot of view. Bodha2 (talk) 08:37, 15 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on K. M. Nanavati v. State of Maharashtra. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20050504162533/http://www.hindustantimes.com/news/specials/proj_tabloid/sylviaprofile.shtml to http://www.hindustantimes.com/news/specials/proj_tabloid/sylviaprofile.shtml

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 09:01, 17 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Last Jury trial in India

The misleading claim that K. M. Nanavati v. State of Maharashtra was the last jury trial in India is very common - it even featured in 'Did you Know'. We should remove it from the article unless it can be substantiated. https://www.sociolegalreview.com/post/not-the-right-people-why-jury-trials-were-abolished-in-india - there seem to be multiple sources (some are payalled) which state that the last jury trial was in West Bengal in the 1970s.