9911796707
TMI Blog1965 (5) TMI 52X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ry Mahant of Sri Bairaghi Matam --a Hindu Religious and Charitable Institution of a monastic nature. The appellant has been residing in the Matam premises, Elephant Gate, Madras which is a public place of worship. On March 22, 1963 at about 10 a.m. the appellant was arrested by the police and immediately produced before the VIII Presidency Magistrate on the same day on a charge under s. 4(l)(a) of the Madras Prohibition Act on the allegation that he was in possession of 3,960 grams of Ganja concealed in a wooden box m the Matam premises without any permit. The appellant pleaded guilty to the charge and upon that plea he was convicted by the Magistrate to rigorous imprisonment for one year and a fine Rs. 50, in default to rigorous imprisonme ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... provisions of s. 243. Criminal Procedure Code, that the appellant has been deprived of the substance of a fair trial, and that the conviction of the appellant is legally invalid. It was also submitted on behalf of the appellant that the necessary ingredients of the offence of possession of the contraband article under s. 4(1) (a) of the Madras Prohibition Act have not been established as a matter of law. 4. It is necessary to reproduce, at this stage, the charge framed by the VIII Presidency Magistrate against the appellant as well as the judgment pronounced in the case. The charge reads as follows : On 22nd March 1963 at about 8 a.m. at No. 1 General Muthiah Mudali street in C-2 limits, the accused was found in possession of 3,960 grams o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... anufacture of liquor or any intoxicating drug or any such materials as are ordinarily used in the tapping of toddy or the manufacture of liquor or any intoxicating drug or any materials which have undergone any process towards the manufacture of liquor or any intoxicating drug or from which any liquor or intoxicating drug has been manufactured, for the possession which he is unable to account satisfactorily, and ********** 7. It cannot be disputed in the present case that there has been a violation by the magistrate of the requirements of s. 243 of the Criminal Procedure Code which states : 243. If the accused admits that he has committed the offence of which he is accused, his admission shall be recorded as nearly as possible in the words ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e in order to prevent any mistake or misapprehension. It has been held by the Madras High Court in Queen-Empress v. Erugadn I.L.R. 15 Mad 83 that the violation of the procedure in s. 243 of the Criminal Procedure Code was sufficiently serious to invalidate the conviction of the accused. The same view has been taken by the Calcutta High Court in Shailabala Dasee v. Emperor I.L.R. 62 Cal. 1127 and by the Allahabad High Court in Mukandi La! v. State AIR1952All212 . In our opinion, These cases correctly lay down the law on the point. 9. It is submitted on behalf of the respondent that under s. 362(2)(A), Criminal Procedure Code it was sufficient if the Magistrate made a memorandum of the substance of the examination of the accused and that it w ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
