Research › Browse › Judgment

Karnataka High Court · body

1981 DIGILAW 201 (KAR)

KUPPASWAMY GOUNDER v. STATE OF KARNATAKA

1981-07-11

D.R.VITHAL RAO, M.S.NESARGI

body1981
NESARGI, J. ( 1 ) KUPPUSWAMY Gounder of Krishnagiri taluk, Dharmapuri District, Tamil nadu State, has been convicted for having committed the offences pun shable under S. 302 (three counts) and S. 332 of the IPC. , by the III Addl. City Civil and Sessions Judge, Metropolitan Area, bangalore City, (Sri S V. Tilgul), in SC no. 35 of 1980. In regard to the offences under S. 302 of the IPC, he has been sentenced to death, while in regard to the offence under S. 332 of the IPC he has been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year. He has filed crl. A. No. 215 of 1981. Crl. Ref Case no. 1 of 1981 has come up before us as having been referred by the said Sessions judge as per the provisions of S. 366 of crl P. C. ( 2 ) FEW facts necessary for the disposal of these matters, may be narrated as follows : at about 2-00 A. M. on 9-4-1980 the said accused stabbed Narayanaswamy who expired at 11-00 P. M. , Ramu who expired at 8-05 P. M. , and also Sunil kumar, Sub-Inspector of Police, who expired at 2-30 A. M. on the next day. Sunil Kumar and his police party happen ed to go there in a van on hearing galata in the railway platform of the cantonment railway station, Bangalore, and when Sunil Kumar caught hold of the wrist of the accused, the accused somehow managed to slip away and stab him. PW-1 Ulaganathan, who was the senior trains clerk, went and lodged information as per Ex. P-l Investigation was taken up. We do not consider it necessary to narrate further facts as, because of certain legal aspects of the case, the trial, according to us, will not be trial in the eye of law. ( 3 ) THE accused was committed to the Sessions Court, Metropolitan Area, bangalore City. Apparently the Principal sessions Judge, Metropolitan Area, made over the sessions Case, in exercise of his powers under S. 194 of the Crl PC. to the II Addl Sessions Judge, Metropolitan area, Bangalore City, who framed charges on 21 8-1980 and recorded the plea of the accused also on that day. On 17-11-1980 City Civil Courts Act came into force by virtue of the Bangalore city Civil Courts Act, 1979. to the II Addl Sessions Judge, Metropolitan area, Bangalore City, who framed charges on 21 8-1980 and recorded the plea of the accused also on that day. On 17-11-1980 City Civil Courts Act came into force by virtue of the Bangalore city Civil Courts Act, 1979. Monthly statements, regarding cases in which the accused are in custody have been received in the office of this Court. In the statement ending on the month of October 1980, this case viz , SC No. 35 of 1980 is shown as having been pending on the file of the II Addl. Sessions Judge, Metropolitan area, Bangalore City, and was posted for evidence In the statement as by the end of November 1980 i. e. , after the coming into force of the Bangalore city Civil Courts Act and conferring of sessions powers under S. 9 (3) Crl. P. C. by the High Court on all the City Civil civil Judges appointed under the Bangalore city Civil Courts Act, the case has been shown as pending before the IV addl. City Civil and Sessions Judge, metropolitan Area, Bangalore City, and posted for evidence. On 30-1-1981, the registrar of the Bangalore City Civil courts, Bangalore, has issued a notification. This notification shows that all the Sessions cases and other matters pending before the II, III and IV Addl. City civil and Sessions Judges are to be tried by them. On 12-1-1981 the III Addl. City Civil and Sessions Judge, Metropolitan area, Bangalore City, Sri S. V. Tilgul, recorded the evidence of P. W.-1 we are informed by the office of this court, that no order of transfer under s. 407 Crl P. C. has been made transferring this case viz. , SC. No. 35 of 1980, from the file of the IV Addl. City Civil and Sessions Judge, Metropolitan Area, bangalore City, to the file of the III Addl city Civil an 1 Sessions Judge, Metropolitan area, Bangalore City. It is clear from the order-sheet maintained in this case that during the period between 20-11-1980 and 12-1-1981 the case has gone up before the IV Addl. City Civil and Sessions Judge and then before the iii Addl City Civil and Sessions Judge sri Tilgul. ( 4 ) BY virtue of S. 194 Crl. It is clear from the order-sheet maintained in this case that during the period between 20-11-1980 and 12-1-1981 the case has gone up before the IV Addl. City Civil and Sessions Judge and then before the iii Addl City Civil and Sessions Judge sri Tilgul. ( 4 ) BY virtue of S. 194 Crl. P. C. the principal City Civil and Sessions Judge, metropolitan Area, Bangalore City, has the power to make over a sessions case for trial and disposal according to law to any Addl City Civil and Sessions Judge. The principal City Civil and Sessions judge cannot withdraw a case made over by virtue of this provision after commencement of trial in view of S. 409 (2) crl. P. C. Therefore, even if it is assumed that the Principal Citv Civil and Sessions judge, Metropolitan Area, Bangalore City had withdrawn the case and made over to the III Addl City Civil and Sessions judge, Metropolitan Area, Bangalore City it would be contrary to law, and the III addl. City Civil and and Sessions Judge (Sri S. V. Tilgul) would not have the necessary power to try and dispose of the case In view of this position, we are clealy of opinion that the trial held by the 111 Addl City Civil and and Sessions judge, Metropolitan Area, Bangalore city, is not at all a trial in the eye of law. Hence, S. 465 of Crl. P. C. also cannot be made use of to regularise this trial. ( 5 ) IN view of the foregoing reasons, the convict ons and sentences passed on the accused are to be set aside. But at the same time the accused cannot be set at liberty taking into consideration the gravity of the offences which he is alleged to have committed and with which he had been charged by the It Addl. Sessions judge, Metropolitan Area Bangalore city. He is to be tried over again in accordance with law. ( 6 ) IN the re suit, we reject the reference and allow the appeal, set aside the convictions and sentences passed on the accused-appellant and direct that the sessions case be transferred to the file of the Principal City Civil and Sessions judge, Metropolitan Area, Bangalore city, in exercise of our powers under S. 407 of the Crl PC. ( 6 ) IN the re suit, we reject the reference and allow the appeal, set aside the convictions and sentences passed on the accused-appellant and direct that the sessions case be transferred to the file of the Principal City Civil and Sessions judge, Metropolitan Area, Bangalore city, in exercise of our powers under S. 407 of the Crl PC. At the same time, we allow liberty to the Principal City civil and Sessions Judge, Metropolitan area, Bangalore City, either to try the case himself and dispose it of according to law, or make over the case to any of the Addl. City Civil and Sessions Judges, in exercise of the power vested in him by s. 194 if Crl. P. C. --- *** --- .