9911796707
TMI Blog1979 (12) TMI 156X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dian Penal Code for committing the murder of one Karsan Kala on 19-1-1976. The learned Sessions Judge acquitted all the three appellants of the charges levelled against them. The State of Gujarat filed an appeal against the order of Sessions Judge acquitting them, to the High Court of Gujarat. A division Bench of the High Court in Criminal Appeal No. 110/77 allowed the appeal of the State and reversed the order of acquittal by the Learned Sessions Judge and convicted them for offences under s. 302/120--B and sentenced them to imprisonment for life. They were also convicted tor lesser offences and sentenced to varying terms of imprisonment The prosecution strongly relied on the evidence of three eye witnesses Rata Mala, Ganesh and Ruda. R ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... After we pronounced our judgment dismissing the appeal summarily under S. 384 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, but before signing the judgment, a decision of this Court-Sita Ram Ors. v. State of U.P. 1979] 2 S.C.R. 1085 was brought to our notice wherein the scope of the power of the Courts to dismiss an appeal summarily under S. 384 of the Code of Criminal Procedure has been referred. In that case an appeal was preferred to this Court under S. 379 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 read with S. 2(a) of the Supreme Court (Enlargement of Criminal Appellate Jurisdiction) Act, 1970. The appeal was listed for preliminary hearing under Rule 15(1) (c) of O.XXI of the Supreme Court Rules 1966. The Appellants filed an application for add ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... onal validity of cl. (c) of rule 15(1) of O.XXI of Supreme Court Rules, was challenged. Alongwith the question of constitutional validity, two other grounds referred to earlier were also raised. The contention of the Learned Counsel that a right of appeal cast an obligation on the Court to send for records of the case, to hear both the parties and to make reasoned judgment, was not accepted by the judgment of the Court. Reasons given by the Court are as follows:- Counsel for the appellant insisted that an absolute right of appeal as he described it, casts an inflexible obligation on the court to send for the record of the case, to hear both parties, and to make a reasoned Judgment. Therefore, to scuttle the appeal by a summary hearing o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
