Skip to content


Emperor Vs. Chunilal Bhagwanji - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectCriminal
CourtMumbai
Decided On
Case NumberCriminal Appeal No. 165 of 1941
Judge
Reported in(1942)44BOMLR438
AppellantEmperor
RespondentChunilal Bhagwanji
DispositionAppeal dismissed
Excerpt:
practice --procedure-criminal appeal-notice to person awarded compensation- criminal procedure code (act v of 1898), section 545.;in appeals against conviction only the crown is entitled to be served with notice and to be heard, though in private prosecutions especially the court may, in its discretion, allow the complainant to be heard. this rule applies to cases in which the complainant has been awarded compensation out of a fine imposed.;paragji v. bhagwanji (1939) 41 bom. l.r. 1231, followed.;where a person, whether the complainant or some one else, has been awarded compensation under section 545 of the criminal procedure code, 1898, be ought to be served with notice of an appeal or revision application which may result in the order of compensation being set aside. if he appears,..........to be heard ; and, in my opinion, that rule applies to cases in which the complainant has been awarded compensation out of a fine imposed. but the further question arises, whether in cases in which some award has been made either to the complainant or to somebody else, notice should be served on the person entitled to the award. the practice in this court seems to be that in revision applications where compensation has been awarded to the complainant, notice is served upon him ; but that is not done in cases of appeals. we think the correct rule should be that where a person, whether the complainant or some one else, has been awarded compensation under section 545 of the criminal procedure code, he ought to be served with notice of an appeal or revision application which may result.....
Judgment:

Beaumont, C.J.

1. [His Lordship upheld the. acquittal on merits and remarked : ] With regard to the point of practice, it was recently held by this Court in Paragji v. Bhagwanji (1939) 41 Bom. L.R. 1231 that in appeals against conviction only the Crown is entitled to be served with notice and to be heard, though in private prosecutions especially the Court may, in its discretion, allow the complainant. to be heard ; and, in my opinion, that rule applies to cases in which the complainant has been awarded compensation out of a fine imposed. But the further question arises, whether in cases in which some award has been made either to the complainant or to somebody else, notice should be served on the person entitled to the award. The practice in this Court seems to be that in revision applications where compensation has been awarded to the complainant, notice is served upon him ; but that is not done in cases of appeals. We think the correct rule should be that where a person, whether the complainant or some one else, has been awarded compensation under Section 545 of the Criminal Procedure Code, he ought to be served with notice of an appeal or revision application which may result in the order of compensation being set aside. If he appears, it will be in the discretion of the Court to hear his advocate or to decline to do so. But if he is served with notice, he can, at any rate, see that his view is placed before the Court by the advocate appearing for Government.

2. In this case we have no doubt that if notice had been served on the complainant, the learned Judge would not have thought it necessary to hear the complainant's counsel as well as counsel for the Crown who was heard. Therefore, the omission to serve notice on the complainant has not vitiated the order of the Sessions Judge.

3. The appeal, therefore, will be dismissed.


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //