RAJENDRAN NAIR Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN the revision petition objection is taken to the decision of the Sessions Court of Trivandrum remitting a case for fresh trial and disposal according to law setting aside the judgment convicting and sentencing the accused. It is the accused who has challenged the order of the sessions Judge. That is because, according to him, the learned Sessions Judge had no right to direct that further evidence be taken by the trial Magistrate. IN as much as he is said to have exercised a power not vested in him by law, the order of the Sessions Judge is said to be vitiated calling for interference in revision. Pursuant to the directions of the Sessions Judge the trial magistrate commenced proceedings to take further evidence at which stage the accused objected to such a course. The learned Magistrate was of the view that since he is bound by the order of remand, irrespective of any question of the propriety or otherwise of taking such evidence, he was obliged to do so. That order of the Magistrate is challenged in the petition under S 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, in Criminal M. P. No. 1096 of 1977.

(2.) THE accused in the case was charged with offences punishable under Ss. 467, 471 and 472 of the Indian Penal Code. He was found guilty of offences punishable under S. 467 and 471 19c. He was convicted and sentenced under those sections. According to the learned Sessions Judge the best evidence that could be adduced was not before the court, such best evidence being the opinion of the hand-writing expert and therefore the learned sessions Judge gave opportunity for the prosecution to adduce such evidence It is the legality and propriety of the course adopted by the Sessions Court that is in controversy here.