Skip to content


Emperor Vs. Vyankatsing Sambhusing - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectCriminal
CourtMumbai
Decided On
Case NumberCriminal Reference No. 27 of 1907
Judge
Reported in(1907)9BOMLR1057
AppellantEmperor
RespondentVyankatsing Sambhusing
Excerpt:
.....304 and 305 of penal code (act xlv of 1860)-verdict of jury on the minor charge-disagreement between judge and jury-reference to high court.;the accused were tried by the judge with, jury on charges under sections 304 and 325, of the indian penal code. the jury found the accused guilty with respect to the charge under section 325 : with this verdict the judge disagreed and he referred the case to the high court under section 307 of the criminal procedure code, 1898:-;that the case should be sent back to the judge who tried it, with a direction that he should pass orders and dispose of it as in a case tried by him with the aid of assessors on the minor charges against the accused, under section 325. - - the court is not satisfied with the reasons given by the sessions judge that..........without deciding that this reference lies, having regard to clause 3 of section 269 of the code of criminal procedure, the court thinks that the case should be sent back to the judge who tried it, with a direction that he should pass orders and dispose of it as in a case tried by him with the aid of assessors on the minor charges against the accused under section 325 of the indian penal code. this is the course suggested by accused's counsel and agreed to by the government pleader. the court is not satisfied with the reasons given by the sessions judge that the charge was really a single one, because as a fact there were two distinct charges to each of which the accused were called on to plead and that brings the case clearly within the provisions of clause 3 of section 269,.....
Judgment:
ORDER

1. Assuming without deciding that this reference lies, having regard to Clause 3 of Section 269 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the Court thinks that the case should be sent back to the Judge who tried it, with a direction that he should pass orders and dispose of it as in a case tried by him with the aid of assessors on the minor charges against the accused under Section 325 of the Indian Penal Code. This is the course suggested by accused's counsel and agreed to by the Government Pleader. The Court is not satisfied with the reasons given by the Sessions Judge that the charge was really a single one, because as a fact there were two distinct charges to each of which the accused were called on to plead and that brings the case clearly within the provisions of Clause 3 of Section 269, Criminal Procedure Code.


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