Skip to content


Emperor Vs. Gokulchand Dwarkadas Morarka - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectCriminal
CourtMumbai
Decided On
Case NumberCriminal Application No. 674 of 1946
Judge
Reported in(1948)50BOMLR378
AppellantEmperor
RespondentGokulchand Dwarkadas Morarka
Excerpt:
.....v of 1898), section 426 (2b) - imprisonment of accused by high court -special leave to appeal to privy council granted to accused-high courts power to suspend sentence and grant bail to accused.;under section 426 (2b) of the criminal procedure code, 1898, where special leave to appeal to the privy council has been granted to a convicted person, it is proper to grant bail in cases in which there is no question of the convicted person's absconding during the pendency of his appeal before the privy council and in which it is obvious that the full sentence will be served before the decision of the privy council can be known. - - by that sub-section it is provided that where a high court is satisfied that a convicted person has been granted special leave to appeal to his majesty in..........been received by the registrar on the appellate side of the high court from the registrar of the privy council informing this court that the privy council have granted the appellant special leave to appeal.2. formerly, there was no power in such cases for any court to grant bail, but on february 20 of this year that circumstance having been pointed out in a then recent case by the privy council, the law was changed and a new sub-section was added to sub-section (2)(a) of section 420 of the code of criminal procedure. by that sub-section it is provided that where a high court is satisfied that a convicted person has been granted special leave to appeal to his majesty in council against the sentence which has been imposed, the court may if it so thinks fit order that pending the appeal.....
Judgment:

Leonard Stone, Kt., C.J.

1. This is an application for bail made on behalf of a convict, Mr. Morarka, who is undergoing a sentence of one month's rigorous imprisonment in Arthur Road Prison. He is in fact in the hospital ward of the jail. A telegram has just been received by the Registrar on the Appellate Side of the High Court from the Registrar of the Privy Council informing this Court that the Privy Council have granted the appellant special leave to appeal.

2. Formerly, there was no power in such cases for any Court to grant bail, but on February 20 of this year that circumstance having been pointed out in a then recent case by the Privy Council, the law was changed and a new sub-section was added to Sub-section (2)(a) of Section 420 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. By that sub-section it is provided that where a High Court is satisfied that a convicted person has been granted special leave to appeal to His Majesty in Council against the sentence which has been imposed, the Court may if it so thinks fit order that pending the appeal the sentence may be suspended and the convicted person relcased on bail.

3. It seems to us that in cases in which there is no question of the convicted person's absconding during the pendency of the appeal before the Privy Council, and in which it is obvious that the full sentence will be served before the decision of the Privy Council can be known, it would be proper to grant bail. In this case those qualifications are met, and, therefore, we propose to grant bail.

4. The appellant will be relcased on bail on entering into a personal recognisance in the sum of Rs. 10,000 with a surety for like amount. It must of course be understood that if the appeal to the Privy Council is ultimately dismissed, the balance of the sentence will be served.


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