Skip to content


In Re: Mukka Muthiriyan and ors. - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectCriminal
CourtChennai
Decided On
Judge
Reported inAIR1916Mad1222(1); 31Ind.Cas.337
AppellantIn Re: Mukka Muthiriyan and ors.
Excerpt:
criminal procedure code (act v of 1898), section 227 - charge, addition of, in appeal--added charge under section 143, penal code--addition, whether valid--pencil code (act xlv of 1860), sections 143, 426, 451. - .....we are unable to agree with the sub-divisional magistrate that the addition of section 143, indian penal code, to the charge at the hearing of the appeal did not place the appellants at any disadvantage in their defence under the second count of the charge.2. the addition of this section would have the effect of imposing a constructive responsibility for individual acts of all persons who were members at the time of the assembly, whereas it would be necessary to prove the guilt of each of the persons charged for his individual acts if the charges were only under sections 451 and 426 of the indian penal code. the section 143 should not have been added and must now be struck out.3. as regards the first count of charge, the magistrate has not addressed himself to a consideration whether the.....
Judgment:
ORDER

1. We are unable to agree with the Sub-Divisional Magistrate that the addition of Section 143, Indian Penal Code, to the charge at the hearing of the appeal did not place the appellants at any disadvantage in their defence under the second count of the charge.

2. The addition of this section would have the effect of imposing a constructive responsibility for individual acts of all persons who were members at the time of the assembly, whereas it would be necessary to prove the guilt of each of the persons charged for his individual acts if the charges were only under Sections 451 and 426 of the Indian Penal Code. The Section 143 should not have been added and must now be struck out.

3. As regards the first count of charge, the Magistrate has not addressed himself to a consideration whether the object of the assembly was unlawful as defined in Section 141, Indian Penal Code. Ordinarily it may be said that there would be no presumption that the mere carrying of savalai kalis would be unlawful, and the Court must, therefore, find that the accused had an intention to use criminal force or commit some other offence at all costs and were not acting in self-defence.

4. We reverse the judgment and direct the Sub-Divisional Magistrate to re-hear the appeal in the light of the above remarks.


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