Skip to content


Kuppuswamy Gownder Vs. the State of Karnataka - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
Overruled ByState of Karnataka Vs. Kuppuswamy Gownder and Ors.
SubjectCriminal
CourtKarnataka High Court
Decided On
Case NumberCriminal Appeal No. 215 and Criminal Referred Case No. 1 of 1981
Judge
Reported in1982CriLJ90; 1981(2)KarLJ509
ActsIndian Penal Code (IPC), 1860 - Sections 302, 332 and 366; Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) , 1973 - Sections 9(3), 194, 407 and 409(2)
AppellantKuppuswamy Gownder
RespondentThe State of Karnataka
Advocates:B.R. Nanjundiah, Amicus Curiae (Through Jail)
Excerpt:
.....it is just and proper to grant the relief of compensation of rs.50,000/- in place of reinstatement. - in view of this position, we are clearly of opinion that the trial held by the iii additional city civil and sessions judge, metropolitan area, bangalore city, is not at all a trial in the eye of law......offences punishable under s. 302 (three counts) and s. 332 of the i.p.c.; by the iii additional city civil and sessions judge, metropolitan area, bangalore city, (sri. s. v. tilgul), in sessions case no. 35 of 1980. in regard to the offences under s. 302 of the i.p.c., he has been sentenced to death while in regard to the offence under s. 332 of the i.p.c., he has been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year. he has filed criminal appeal no. 215 of 1981. criminal referred case no. 1 of 1981 has come up before us as having been referred by the said sessions judge as per the provisions of s. 366 of the i.p.c. 2. few facts necessary for the disposal of these matters, may be narrated as follows : at about 2.00 a.m. on 9-4-1980 the said accused stabbed narayanaswamy who.....
Judgment:
Nesargi, J.

1. Kuppuswamy Gounder of Krishnagiri Taluk, Dharmapuri District, Tamil Nadu, State has been convicted for having committed the offences punishable under S. 302 (three counts) and S. 332 of the I.P.C.; by the III Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Metropolitan Area, Bangalore City, (Sri. S. V. Tilgul), in Sessions Case No. 35 of 1980. In regard to the offences under S. 302 of the I.P.C., he has been sentenced to death while in regard to the offence under S. 332 of the I.P.C., he has been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year. He has filed Criminal Appeal No. 215 of 1981. Criminal Referred Case No. 1 of 1981 has come up before us as having been referred by the said Sessions Judge as per the provisions of S. 366 of the I.P.C.

2. Few facts necessary for the disposal of these matters, may be narrated as follows :

At about 2.00 a.m. on 9-4-1980 the said accused stabbed Narayanaswamy who expired at 11.00 p.m., Ramu who expired at 8.05 p.m., and also Sunil Kumar, Sub-Inspector of Police, who expired at 2.30 a.m. on the next day. Sunil Kumar and his police party happened to go there in a van on hearing Bangalore in the railway platform of the Cantonment railway station, Bangalore, and when Sunil Kumar caught hold of the wrist of the accused, the accused somehow managed to slip away and stab him. PW 1 Ulaganathan, who was the senior trains clerk, went and lodged information as per Ex. P. 1. Investigation was taken up. We do not consider it necessary to narrate further facts as, because of certain legal aspects of the case, the trial, according to us, will not be trial in the eye of law.

3. The accused was committed to the Sessions Court, Metropolitan Area, Bangalore City. Apparently the Principal Sessions Judge, Metropolitan Area, made over the Sessions Case, in exercise of his powers under section 194 of the Cr.P.C., to the II Additional Sessions Judge, Metropolitan Area, Bangalore City, who framed charges on 21-8-1980 and recorded the plea of the accused also on that day. On 17-11-80 City Civil Courts Act came into force by virtue of the Bangalore City Civil Courts Act, 1979. Monthly statements regarding cases in which the accused are in custody have been received in the office of this Court. In the statement ending in the month of October 1980, this case viz., Sessions Case No. 35 of 1980 is shown as having been pending on the file of the II Additional Sessions Judge, Metropolitan Area, Bangalore City, and was posted for evidence. In the statement as by the end of November 1980 i.e., after the coming into force of the Bangalore City Civil Courts Act and conferring of Sessions powers under Section 9(3) of the Cr.P.C. by the High Court on all the City Civil Judges appointed under the Bangalore City Civil Courts Act, the case has been shown as pending before the IV Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Metropolitan Area, Bangalore City, and posted for evidence. On 30-1-1981, the Registrar of the Bangalore City Civil Courts, Bangalore, has issued a notification. This notification shows that all the Sessions cases and other matters pending before the II, III and IV Additional City Civil and Sessions Judges are to be tried by them. On 12-1-1981 the III Additional City Civil and Sessions judge, Metropolitan Area, Bangalore City, Sri. S. V. Tilgul, recorded the evidence of P.W. 1. We are informed by the office of this Court that no order of transfer under section 407 of Cr.P.C. has been made transferring this case viz., Sessions Case No. 35 of 1980, from the file of the IV Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Metropolitan Area, Bangalore City, to the file of the III Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Metropolitan Area, Bangalore City. It is clear from the order-sheet maintained in this case that during the period between 20-11-1980 and 12-1-1981 the case has gone up before the IV additional City Civil and Sessions Judge and then before the III Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge Sri. Tilgul.

4. By virtue of S. 194 of the Cr.P.C. the Principal City Civil and Sessions Judge, Metropolitan Area, Bangalore City, has the power to make over a sessions case for trial and disposal according to law to any additional City Civil and Sessions Judge. The Principal City Civil and Sessions Judge cannot withdraw a case made over by virtue of this provision after commencement of trial in view of S. 409(2) of the Cr.P.C. Therefore, even if it is assumed that the principal City Civil and Sessions Judge, Metropolitan Area, Bangalore City, had withdrawn the case and made over to the III Additional City Civil and Session Judge, Metropolitan Area, Bangalore City, it would be contrary to law, and the III Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge (Sri. S. V. Tilgul) would not have the necessary power to try and dispose of the case. In view of this position, we are clearly of opinion that the trial held by the III Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Metropolitan Area, Bangalore City, is not at all a trial in the eye of law. Hence, S. 465 of the Criminal P.C. also cannot be made use of to regularise this trial.

5. In view of the foregoing reasons, the convictions and sentences passed on the accused are to be set aside. But at the same time the accused cannot be set at liberty taking into consideration the gravity of the offences which he is alleged to have committed and with which he have been charged by the II Additional Sessions Judge, Metropolitan Area, Bangalore City, he is to be tried over again in accordance with law.

6. In the result, we reject the reference and allow the appeal, set aside the convictions and sentences passed on the accused-appellant and direct that the Sessions case be transferred to the file of the Principal City Civil and Sessions Judge, Metropolitan Area, Bangalore City, in exercise of our powers under S. 407 of the Criminal P.C. At the same time, we allow liberty to the Principal City Civil and Sessions Judge, Metropolitan Area, Bangalore City, either to try the case himself and dispose it of according to law, or make over the case to any of the Additional City Civil and Sessions Judges, in exercise of the powers vested in him by S. 194 of the Cr.P.C.

7. Order accordingly.


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