Skip to content


In Re: Godala Sanyasi and ors. - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectCriminal
CourtChennai
Decided On
Reported inAIR1948Mad251; (1947)2MLJ383
AppellantIn Re: Godala Sanyasi and ors.
Cases Referred and Public Prosecutor v. K. Dasapai
Excerpt:
- - 60. the case therefore clearly falls outside section 413 of the code of criminal procedure which restricts the right of appeal......under each of the sections 147 and 323, indian penal code. the six accused filed an appeal to the sessions judge, west godavari. the learned sessions judge held that the appeal was not maintainable because there was no sentence of fine exceeding rs. 50 and applied the provisions of section 413 of the code of criminal procedure. the learned sessions judge made a reference to two decisions of this court in in re p. venkataramqyya : (1939)2mlj878 and public prosecutor v. k. dasapai (1936) m.w.n. (crl.) 37 which dealt with the construction of section 415 of the code of criminal procedure. but i think it is unnecessary to refer either to that section or to the two decisions for the purpose of this revision petition.2. section 413 says that:.there shall be no appeal by a convicted person in.....
Judgment:
ORDER

Rajamannar, J.

1. In C.C. No. 40 of 1946 on the file of the Additional First Glass Magistrate, Tanuksu,' accused, 1 and 3 were sentenced to pay a fine of Rs,. 40 each in respect of each of the offences under Sections 148 and 324 of the Indian Penal Code respectively. Accused 2, 4, 5 and 6 were sentenced to pay a fine of Rs. 30 each under each of the Sections 147 and 323, Indian Penal Code. The six accused filed an appeal to the Sessions Judge, West Godavari. The learned Sessions Judge held that the appeal was not maintainable because there was no sentence of fine exceeding Rs. 50 and applied the provisions of Section 413 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The learned Sessions Judge made a reference to two decisions of this Court in In re P. Venkataramqyya : (1939)2MLJ878 and Public Prosecutor v. K. Dasapai (1936) M.W.N. (Crl.) 37 which dealt with the construction of Section 415 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. But I think it is unnecessary to refer either to that section or to the two decisions for the purpose of this revision petition.

2. Section 413 says that:.there shall be no appeal by a convicted person in cases in which... a Court of Session or District Magistrate or other Magistrate of the First Class passes a sentence of fine not exceeding Rs. go only.

This is really in the nature of a limitation on the general right of appeal given to a convicted person under Section 408 of the Code. It is therefore necessary to see if in this case it can be said that the trial Magistrate passed a sentence of fine not exceeding Rs. 50 only. Actually taking the individual accused it cannot be said that any of the accused has been sentenced to a fine not exceeding Rs. 50, because the first accused and third accused were sentenced to a total fine of Rs. 80 each, while the rest of the accused were each sentenced to a total fine of Rs. 60. The case therefore clearly falls outside Section 413 of the Code of Criminal Procedure which restricts the right of appeal. The result is that under Section 408 of the Code of Criminal Procedure the accused in the case would have a right of appeal to the Court of Session.

3. The order of the lower Court dismissing the appeal is set aside. The learned Sessions Judge will restore the appeal to his file and dispose of it in accordance with law.


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