K C PAIPAL Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The common question that arises in these two revision petitions is as to which one of the two courts of Sessions is the proper appellate forum for a case tried and convicted by a First Class Magistrate having jurisdiction over both

(2.) The question that arises for decision is whether it is the location of the Trial Court or the place where the offence was committed that should determine the venue of appeal. Now it is common ground that as the Factories Act is silent regarding the appellate forum for convictions under the Act, the venue of appeal is to be determined by the provisions of the Criminal Procedure Code, regarding appeals from the orders of a Magistrate of the First Class.

(3.) Two opposing views were placed before me In Valia Ambu Poduval v. Emperor (ILR XXX Mad. 136) the Madras High Court took the view that as S.408 Criminal Procedure Code which deals with appeals from the orders of a First Class Magistrate says merely that appeals lie to the Sessions Court without any further explanatory words, the venue of appeal may be determined with reference to S.435 which deals with the revisional jurisdiction of courts and which lays down that a Sessions Judge may call for and examine the records of any inferior criminal court situate within his jurisdiction. It was further held that the word situate in the section means where the court ordinarily sits and as such an appeal from a conviction by a Magistrate lies to the Sessions Judge having territorial jurisdiction over the place where the Magistrates Court is located irrespective of the place where the offence was committed.