Court : Allahabad
Reported in : 76Ind.Cas.568
Stuart, J.1. I do not agree with the view taken by the learned Sessions Judge. It is not illegal to hold a joint trial under Section 107. Section 117(4) clearly shows that.2. The learned Sessions Judge appears to be referring to the decision of Har Dutt Panda v. Emperor 33 Ind. Cas. 645 : 14 A.L.J. 268 : 17 Cr. L.J. 165. That decision does not lay down that the learned Judge appears to think that it does lay down. It lays down that the joint trial of two contending parties should not be allowed in a 107-proceeding. I find that Ganga Pershad and Parshadi Lal were not contending parties but were on the same side. The complaint had been made against them jointly.3. On the merits I find no reason to interfere with the order passed against Ganga Pershad.4. The omission to frame a charge did not prejudice him in any way.5. I refuse to interfere and direct that the record be returned....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : (1923)ILR45All143; 74Ind.Cas.270
Stuart, J.1. This is an application from the Sessions Judge of Meerut requesting me to set aside a conviction passed by his predecessor and affirmed by Piggott, J., in appeal, on the ground that on certain materials that have since come to the knowledge of the District Magistrate there is a doubt of the convict's guilt.2. This is not a matter which I can possibly take up in revision. Even if I myself had passed the order dismissing the appeal I could not revise it and I certainly cannot revise the order of another Judge of this Court. There can be no revision in the matter.3. I return the record to the District Magistrate in order that he may refer the matter to the Local Government who, have power under Chapter XXIX of the Code of Criminal Procedure....
Tag this Judgment!