Skip to content


Adiladdi and ors. Vs. Emperor - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
CourtKolkata
Decided On
Judge
Reported in87Ind.Cas.840
AppellantAdiladdi and ors.
RespondentEmperor
Excerpt:
criminal procedure, code (act v of 1898), section 360 - deposition of witnesses read over by clerk, validity of failure to comply with, provisions of section, effect, of. - .....case, as we find that the conviction and sentence cannot stand on the ground that in the court of sessions the provisions of section 360, cr. p.c., had not been complied with.2. we must under the circumstances send the case back for re-trial. having regard to the sentence that the additional sessions judge considered sufficient in the case of the accused and also having regard to the fact that the charge under section 304-149 failed before the sessions court, we consider that the case should be tried by a magistrate of the first class and it is not necessary that it should be tried by the court of session.3. we, therefore, set aside the conviction and sentence on the appellants and send the case back for trial according to law by the district magistrate or some other magistrate having.....
Judgment:

1. In this case the appellants take objection to the conviction and sentence on the ground that the depositions of some witnesses were not read over to them in the presence of the accused or their Pleader as provided for in Section 360, Cr. P.C. A further objection has been taken that the depositions of some of the witnesses before the Committing Magistrate as soon, as they were completed were read over to the witnesses by the Bench Clerk and their signature taken while the Court was recording the examination of other witnesses in the case. This procedure is not warranted by the law, and it is not a compliance with the provisions of Section 360 Cr. P.C. A point might be raised whether under such circumstances the commitment should be quashed or not. It is not necessary for us to decide the question in this particular case, as we find that the conviction and sentence cannot stand on the ground that in the Court of Sessions the provisions of Section 360, Cr. P.C., had not been complied with.

2. We must under the circumstances send the case back for re-trial. Having regard to the sentence that the Additional Sessions Judge considered sufficient in the case of the accused and also having regard to the fact that the charge under Section 304-149 failed before the Sessions Court, we consider that the case should be tried by a Magistrate of the First Class and it is not necessary that it should be tried by the Court of Session.

3. We, therefore, set aside the conviction and sentence on the appellants and send the case back for trial according to law by the District Magistrate or some other Magistrate having First Class powers as the District Magistrate may appoint in this behalf.


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