GADIRAJU NARAYANARAJU Vs. STATE OF TAMIL NADU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this case the four petitioners have been convicted for offences under Sections 325 and 323 and 323 read with Section 34 I.P.C. The first accused is sentenced to four months' R.I. and a fine 'of Rs. 100 for an offence under Section 325 I.P.C. and the others are sentenced to pay a fine of Rs. 100 each for offences under Section 323 and 323 read with Section 34 I.P.C.

(2.) The evidence on which these petitioners have been convicted has been accepted by both the courts below and after going through it, I see no reason to reject it. But the learned advocate has raised questions of law which arise on the following facts:

(3.) The defence closed its case on 2nd December 1947 and C.W. 1 was examined on 16th December 1947 and the Magistrate had posted it for arguments (at the instance of the defence counsel) to 21st December 1947. On 21st December 1947 the pleader instead of advancing arguments, presented a petition under Section 526(8) Cri.P.C. praying for an adjournment as he intended to move the High Court for transfer. The petition was dismissed. The Magistrate was then under orders of transfer. He therefore posted the case for judgment to 22nd December 1947 and as the accused were absent on that day, he handed over charge to his successor with the judgment he had already written and signed. The successor adjourned the case and on the adjourned date the accused presented a petition under Section 350 Cri.P.C. for a de novo trial and the same was rejected on 14th December 1948 and the successor delivered the judgment on the same day.