PAYARE LAL Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant Payare Lal was the Tehsildar of Patiala. He and Bishan Chand, a Patwar clerk of the Tehsil Office, were prosecuted for offences under S. 5 (2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947. The Criminal Law Amendment Act, 1952 (Act XLVI of 1952), to which it will be convenient hereafter to refer as the Act, required the trial to be held by a special Judge appointed under it and in accordance with certain provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure mentioned in S. 8 of the Act. The principal question in this appeal turns on the construction of sub-sec. (1) of this section which we will later set out.

(2.) The trial commenced before S. Narinder Singh the special Judge, Patiala. He heard the evidence but before he could deliver a judgment he was transferred and was succeeded by S. Jagjit Singh. S. Jagjit Singh did not recall the witnesses and hear the evidence over again, but proceeded without any objection from either side, with the trial from the stage at which his predecessor had left it and having heard the arguments of the advocates for the parties, delivered his judgment convicting both, the accused of the offences with which they had been charged and passed certain sentences on them.

(3.) The accused appealed against their conviction to the High Court of Punjab. The appeals came to be heard by Mehar Singh J. who, though no point had been taken by the accused, himself felt considerable difficulty as to whether S. Jagjit Singh had the power to decide the case on the evidence recorded by his predecessor and referred the matter to a larger bench taking the view that if the course followed was defective, the defect would be one of jurisdiction of the Court and could not be cured by the consent of parties.