JUDGEMENT
-
(1.) EIGHT persons were charged under Sections 147, 323, 325, and 326 read with Section 149,
penal Code. They were tried by Shri Balram Sinha, Temporary Civil and Sessions Judge of
gorakhpur, in respect of the aforesaid offences. The trial court acquitted all of them by its order
dated 24-7-1953.
(2.) ON 25-1-1954 the Government filed an appeal in this Court against the said order of acquittal. Along with the memorandum of appeal, the Government did not file a certified copy of the
judgment of the trial court. A typed copy of the judgment was, however, annexed to the
memorandum of appeal. On the same day the office made a report that the copy of the judgment
filed along with the petition of appeal was not a certified one. A certified copy of the judgment
was, however, filed by the appellant on 25-2-1954, after the period of limitation for filing the
government appeal had already expired. This copy was accepted by the Court on 25-2-1954. (Note: This order of the Court appears to have been erroneously dated as 25-1-1954 ). The
appellant was allowed three days' time for making an application under Section 5, Limitation Act
for condoning the delay in furnishing the copy and filing the appeal. On 27-2-1954, the applicant filed an application under Section 5, Limitation Act praying that the
delay in tiling the certified copy of the judgment of the trial Court and in filing the appeal be
condoned. This application was ordered to be put up' before a Division Bench for necessary
orders. It was accordingly placed before us for orders. At the time of the hearing of the
application, the learned counsel for the appellant, however, took up the position that the typed
copy of the judgment of the trial court filed along with the memorandum of appeal constituted a
sufficient compliance with the requirements of law. He argued that Section 419, Criminal P. C. did not require that the copy of the judgment filed along with the memorandum of appeal should
be a certified one. He, accordingly, contended that the appeal was filed within limitation. The
matter has been argued ex parte before us by the counsel for the State, as no notice has so far
been issued to the opposite party.
(3.) HAVING heard the learned counsel for the State, I find myself unable to agree with this plea. This petition of appeal was filed under Section 419, Criminal P. C. which provides as follows: "every appeal shall be made in the form of a petition in writing presented by the appellant or his
pleader, and every such petition shall (unless the Court to which it is presented otherwise directs)be accompanied by a copy of the judgment or order appealed against, and, in cases tried by a
jury, a copy of the heads of the charge recorded under Section 367. " It is argued on behalf of the State that all that the above section requires is that the memorandum
of appeal should be accompanied by "a copy of ' the judgment or order appealed against. " It does
not say that the copy that should accompany the memorandum of appeal should be a certified
copy. It is contended that a typed copy filed along with the memorandum of appeal is a copy of
the judgment and its filing, therefore, would be a sufficient compliance with the requirements of
law.;
Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.