PEDDA VENKATAPATHI AND OTHERS Vs. STATE
LAWS(APH)-1955-8-45
HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
Decided on August 24,1955

Pedda Venkatapathi And Others Appellant
VERSUS
STATE Respondents


Referred Judgements :-

PUBLIC PROSECUTOR V. SINNAPPA [REFERRED TO]
SABIRER MA VS. BEHARI MOHAN PAL [REFERRED TO]


JUDGEMENT

- (1.)These two cases arise out of Criminal Appeals Nos. 7 and 8 of 1955 on the file of the Sessions Judge, Cuddrmah, which were filed against the judgments of the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Proddatur in C. C. Nos. 255 and 973 of 1954 respectively. There were two accused in C. C. No. 255 of 54 and while accused 1 was charged under Section 396, Indian Penal Code, accused 2 was charged under Section 324, Indian Penal Code.
In the other case, there was only one accused and he was charged for an offence under Rule 34, Indian Penal Code. The case strains nil the three petitioners was that on 11-7-1954 while P.W. 1, one Challavenkata Reddi, was going on the road, the three accused emerged from the house of the father of accused 2 in C. C. No. 255 of 1954 and attacked him with spears. Each accused caused one injury, the one by accused 1 in the first case proving to be grievous.

The complaint was filed by P.W. 1 against all the three accused. After investigation, the police charge-sheeted only the two accused in C. C. No. 255 of 1954. Not satisfied with this, P.W. 1 filed a private complaint. The learned Sub-Divisional Magistrate took on file the private complaint as a different case and tried it separately. Some of the witnesses examined in one case were not examined in the other, though three of them were common to both the cases.

The learned Sub-Divisional Magistrate discussed the evidence in each case separately, writing two judgments, and convicted the accused in both the cases. He awarded to accused 1 in C. C 255 of 1954 one year's rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 100/- under Section 326, Indian Penal Code, and to accused 2 six months' rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 100/- under Section 324, Indian Penal Code.

In the other case, the accused was convicted under Section 324, Indian Penal Code, and sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for six months and to a fine of Rs. 100/-. On appeal, the learned Sessions Judge, who wrote a common judgment, while confirming the convictions, reduced the sentences.

(2.)In these revision cases, it is urged that the learned Sessions Judge used the evidence recorded by the trial Court in one case against the accused in the other case and 'vice versa' and this had vitiated his judgment. This complaint seems to be a legitimate one. He has freely imported the evidence in one case into another, and did deal with the evidence in each case separately. In my opinion, the procedure adopted by him is warranted by the provisions of the Criminal Procedure Code.
(3.)Section 353 of the Code provides : "Except as otherwise expressly provided, all evidence taken under Chapters XVIII, XX, XXI, XXII and XXIII shall be taken in the presence of the accused, or when his personal attendance is dispensed with, in the presence of his pleader."
;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.