STATE OF U P Vs. LATIF

JUDGEMENT

(1.) ON a reference made by a learned Single Judge of this Court, the following question has been placed before us for decision :

(2.) THE facts giving rise to the reference of the above noted question are necessary to be noted Latif, Jafir, Chhotey and Abdul Aziz applicants stood their trial for offences under sections 302 and 323/34 IPC before the Sessions Judge, Rampur. On conclusion of trial the: Sessions Judge acquitted the applicants. Against the aforesaid order of acquittal, the State Government preferred an appeal under section 378 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 before this Court. Along with the appeal the State filed a separate Miscellaneous application for grant of leave for filing appeal as contemplated by section 378 (3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, (hereinafter referred to as 'the Code'). THE appeal as well as the application for grant of leave both were listed together before brother I. P. Singh in accordance with the general order issued by the Chief Justice in exercise of his powers under the proviso (a) to rule 2 of Chapter V, Part I- High Court Rules, 1952. On 31-8-1984, I. P Singh, J. granted leave and entertained the appeal and directed for issue of notices and bailable warrants to the applicant-accused, in pursuance to the notice issued by the Court the accused put in appearance and tiled an application purporting to be under sections 378/384/382 of the Code read with Article 226 of the Constitution. On their behalf a submission was made before the learned Single Judge that a Judge singly has no jurisdiction to grant leave or to entertain the appeal and to issue notice to the accused in the appeal filed under section 378 of the Code. A further submission was made that proviso (a) to rule 2 of Chapter V, Part I, High Court Rules, 1952 which confers power on the Chief Justice to direct that any case or class of cases may be heard by a Bench of two Judges, as well as the order dated 29-6-1978 issued by the Chief Justice were ultra vires of sections 368 and 369 of the Code, THE learned Single Judge was of the opinion that the matter was of wide importance and he therefore referred the question for decision to a larger Bench.

(3.) CONSTITUTION of Benches and allocation of cases for hearing to a single Judge or a Bench of two Judges is regulated by the Rules framed by the High Court under Article 225 of the CONSTITUTION of India. This Court has also framed rules known as Allahabad High Court Rules, 1952. Chapter V of the Rules deals with jurisdiction of Judges sitting alone or in Division Bench. Rule 1 as contained in Chapter V provides that Judges shall sit alone or in such Division Courts as may be constituted from time to time and may do such work as may be allotted by the Chief Justice or in accordance with his directions. Rule 2 prescribes matters which shall be heard and disposed of by a Judge sitting alone. These include civil as well as matters arising out of Criminal law. Rule 2 (vii) which relates to criminal appeals and applications is as under :