LAWS(MAD)-1953-2-25

IN RE: GAFFAR KHAN Vs. STATE

Decided On February 02, 1953
In Re: Gaffar Khan Appellant
V/S
STATE Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a petition by the second accused in Sessions Case No. 8 of 1953 for quashing the order of committal regarding him. He prayed to the office for posting the petition today "before me, for hearing and disposal before I began to hear the Sessions Case. The office has, in view of the decision in - - 'Emperor v. Huseinalli Vilayatalli', : AIR 1942 Bom 212 (A), and other cases, felt a doubt whether a Judge of the High Court presiding over the High Court Criminal Sessions, having in that capacity no appellate or revisional jurisdiction, has jurisdiction to hear and dispose of such a petition for quashing a committal like this. It thinks such a petition can only be moved on the appellate side of the High Court, and has referred Mr. Vaz, learned counsel for the 2nd accused, to move it in the Admission Court. At the instance of Mr. Vaz, it has posted the petition before me for final orders.

(2.) BUT , after hearing Mr. Vas. I am not satisfied that there is any patent 'error of law' warranting the quashing of the committal. The many grounds relied on by him, like substituting a new and false charge -sheet, in the place of the original one, making this petitioner, a 'bete noire' of the police, the principal culprit in the place of one All Baksh, the man originally named as the principal culprit, the arrest of the petitioner two days before the date given 'now' by the ponce, his being kept in illegal police detention for two days, and the evidence being totally inadequate for convicting the petitioner, are matters of 'fact', and 'hotly disputed fact'. I am, therefore, of opinion that this is not a case for quashing the committal, on this belated and eleventh -hour application, but a case only fit for trial and disposal in the usual course. The case is ready for hearing today. The whole evidence can be heard today itself and the case disposed of tomorrow. So I dismiss this petition. Mr. Vaz will, of course, be free to urge every argument, in law and in fact, at the end of the trial which will now go on.