Queen-empress Vs. Daya Bhima and ors.

criminal procedure code (act x of 1882), section 188 - liability of native indian subjects for offences committed out of british india. - section 31(4) (since repealed) :[tarun chatterjee & h.l.dattu, jj] jurisdiction of high court - respondent, a government company, chartered appellants vessel to carry rock phosphate from togo to west coast india - dispute arose between parties - under agreement, respondent had chosen mumbai as port of delivery vessel carrying rock phosphate was delivered at port of bombay - application filed by respondent earlier before delhi high court for appointment of certain individual as arbitrator had become infructuous because of his demise held, high court of bombay, is not correct in rejecting arbitration petition filed by appellant on ground of lack of jurisdiction. 1. as the accused are native indian subjects of her majesty charged with committing offences under section 407 and sections 407 and 109 of the indian penal code at a place beyond the limits of british india, they may, under the provisions of the section 188, criminal procedure code, be dealt with in respect of such offences as if they had been committed at any place within british india at which the accused may be found. in the present case the accused were found at a place in the ahmedabad district. they can, therefore, be tried in that district: see empress v. magaulal i.l.r. 6 bom. 622 . the proviso to section 188 has no application to the present case, as there is no political agent in the portuguese territories of daman, where the offences charged against the accused are said to have been committed. the court, therefore, reverses the joint sessions judge's order of acquittal, and directs that the accused be tried by the court of sessions at ahmedabad, to which they have been duly committed.