PUNO VITHOBA GAOCAR Vs. PORO CUSTA GOACAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a reference made by the learned Sessions Judge, Panjim, under S. 438 of the Criminal P.C.

(2.) The recommendation by him is that the conviction of the applicants under Ss.379, 447 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code in a summary trial be set aside and the applicants retried, in view of the fact that the value of the paddy stated to have been stolen by the applicants is considerable. Applicant Puno Vithoba Gaocar was sentenced to pay a fine of Rs. 100 or, in default, to undergo 20 days, simple imprisonment. The other applicants were sentenced to pay a fine of Rs. 50 or, in default, to undergo 10 days' simple imprisonment.

(3.) The relevant fact are that the respondent (Poro Cuata Gaocar) filed a complaint on 8th October 1965 accusing the applicants of theft under S. 379 and other offences under Ss.141, 149, 341, 390, 695, 513, 447 and 503 read with S. 34 of the Indian Penal Code. The learned Magistrate proceeded with the trial as a warrant case. He examined the complainant on oath but before he could record further evidence he was transferred and in his place the present learned Magistrate dealt with the case. He tried the cage summarily relying on the provisions of S. 260 of the Criminal P.C. The charge framed by him was under Ss.379, 447 and 506 of the Indian Penal Cede. This was what was intimated to the applicants in accordance with the requirements of S. 263 of the Criminal P.C. The offences were tried summarily on the assumption that that the value of the stolen paddy did not exceed Rs. 200.