PUBLIC PROSECUTOR ANDHRA PRADESH Vs. DEVIREDDI NAGI REDDI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) .This petition comes on for hearing before us as a result of the reference made by one of us (Chandrasekhara Sastri, J.) sitting with Jaganmohan Reddi, J. This petition is filed by the Public Prosecutor Andhra Pradesh, under Article 225 of the Constitution and section 561-A of the Code of Criminal Procedure, to declare that the Judgment of our learned brother, Mr. Justice Sanjeeva Row Nayudu, dated 6th July, 1959, in Criminal Appeal No. 14 of 1959 and Criminal Revision Case No. 682 of 1958 is without jurisdiction void and of no legal effect and to quash the same.

(2.) The circumstances under which the application was filed are as follows :- The respondent, Devireddi Nagi Reddi was tried by the Sessions Judge of Cuddapah in Sessions Case No. 43 of 1958 on a charge under section 302 of the Indian Penal Code for having caused the death of one Subbi Reddi. The learned Sessions Judge convicted him under section 326 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced him to two years rigorous imprisonment. The accused thereupon preferred Criminal Appeal No. 14 of 1959 to this Court. As against the order of implied acquittal on the charge of murder there was no appeal to this Court by the State under section 417, Criminal Procedure Code. Sri Justice Sanjeeva Row Nayudu suo motu issued a notice under section 439, Criminal Procedure Code, to the respondent to show cause why the sentence passed on him should not be enhanced. Both Criminal Appeal No. 14 of 1959 and Criminal Revision Case No. 682 of 1958 were heard together by Sri Justice Sanjeeva Row Nayudu. The learned Judge, by his Judgment, dated 6th July, 1959, altered the conviction from one under section 326, Indian Penal Code, to one under section 302, Indian Penal Code, and sentenced the repondent to imprisonment for life. On the interp etation of section 423 (1) (b) and 423 (1-A), Criminal Procedure Code, the learned Judge took the view that the entire matter " in relation to and bearing upon the charge on which the accused was tried " was before him and that he was entitled to alter the findirg to ore under section 302, Indian Penal Code. In paragraph 3 of the application it was contended that the Judgment was without jurisdiction, and, therefore, a nullity as it was outside the authority conferred upon the High Court under sections 432 (1)(b) and 423 (1-A) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

(3.) Another contention that was raised in the application was that, on a true construction of rule 218 of the Criminal Rules of Practice, a single Judge had no jurisdiction to alter the finding under section 423 (1) (b) and 423 (1-A), Criminal Procedure Code, and convict the accused under section 302, Indian Penal Code. The explanation that was given for the delay of over two years in filing the application was under section 561-A, Criminal Procedure Code, was that the decision of the Full Bench of this Court in Thadi Mara) ana, In re, 1959 2 An.W.R. 29 : ILR 1959 AP 454 (FB). in regard to the true interpretation of section 423(1)(b) of the Crimmal Procedure Code was the subject-matter of appeal to the Supreme Court, and that the decision of the Supreme Court was rendered only on 24th July, 1961. When the application came on for hearing before a Division Bench, consisting of ore of us (Chandrasekhara Sastri, J.), it was felt that the questions raked in the Criminal Miscellaneous Petition were questions of gereral importance which should be decided by a Full Bench of this Court. It was consequently posted before us for final disposal.