The Sessions Judge finds that 1st accused was not present at the scene of offence but at a place 50 or 60 miles away. There is no finding that 5 persons or more took part in the offence. Three were originally put up for trial and were convicted and two were subsequently put up for trial. One was acquitted on the ground that he did not take any part and the appellant was convicted under Sects. 147 and 304.
On the findings of the Sessions Judge it is difficult to support a conviction as it is not shown that 5 or more persons took part in the offence. It is not shown that the appellant did any act which caused the death of Veerappa Tevan and he can only be convicted if it is shown that there was an unlawful assembly of 5 or more persons whose common object was to commit an offence under Sect. 304 and appellant was one of them. The Public Prosecutor says he cannot support the conviction on the findings. He asks for a retrial but I do not think it necessary as I consider a conviction on the evidence doubtful. I set aside the conviction and sentence and direct him to be set at liberty.
In Re, Ramaswami Tevan v.
In Re, Ramaswami Tevan v.
(High Court Of Judicature At Madras)
Criminal Appeal No. 197 Of 1921 | 29-09-1921
Advocate List
- For the Appellant K.S. Ramabadra Aiyar, Advocate. For the Crown Public Prosecutor.
Bench
- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KUMARASWAMI SASTRIAR
Eq Citations
- 69 IND. CAS. 380
- LQ/MadHC/1921/190
Head Note
- **Key Legal Issue**: Whether the conviction under Sections 147 and 304 of the Indian Penal Code can be sustained based on the findings of the Sessions Judge. - **Findings of the Sessions Judge**: - The 1st accused was not present at the scene of the offense but at a place 50 or 60 miles away. - There was no finding that five persons or more took part in the offense. - **Conviction and Appeal**: - Three persons were initially put up for trial, convicted, and sentenced. - Subsequently, two more persons were put up for trial, one of whom was acquitted for not taking part in the offense. - The appellant was convicted under Sections 147 and 304 of the Indian Penal Code. - **Legal Analysis**: - Based on the findings of the Sessions Judge, it is difficult to uphold the conviction under Section 304 because it is not shown that the appellant did any act causing the death of the victim. - There is also no evidence that the appellant was part of an unlawful assembly of five or more persons with the common object of committing an offense under Section 304. - **Decision**: - The Public Prosecutor concedes that the conviction cannot be sustained based on the findings. - The court sets aside the conviction and sentence and directs the appellant to be set at liberty. - **Additional Information**: - The court declined the Public Prosecutor's request for a retrial, considering a conviction on the evidence to be doubtful.
