VELLANKI GOPAL REDDY Vs. CHENCHU VENKAYYA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These two appeals are against the judgment of the Special Judge, S.P.E. Cases, at Secunderabad in C.C.No. 19 of 1959 on his file. There were three accused in that case namely B.N. Murthy, the appellant in C.A. No. 394 of 1960, who was A-1; C. Narayana, the appellant in C.A. No. 397 of 1960, who was A-2 and D.K. Chandraiah, who was A-3. A-3 was acquitted by the lower Court and we are not concerned with A-3 in these proceedings since there is no appeal relating to him.

(2.) Six charges were framed against the accused as follows:

(3.) At the outset, the learned Public Prosecutor raised a preliminary contention to the effect that the entire trial by the Special Judge, Secunderabad was void and that his judgment was illegal in view of the fact that the Special Judge, Secunderabad based his judgment purely on the evidence which had been recorded by his predecessor the Special Judge, Chittoor, which it was not competent for him to do so. He argues that the only course open to this Court is to order a re-trial. In order to appreciate this contention, a few facts appear necessary to be mentioned. In the present case, A-1 issued the permits (Exs. P-3 and P-4) in the year 1952. The transport of the tobacco was also made in the year 1952 and the offences concerned are said to have been committed in 1952. The police filed the charge sheet on 23-9-1956 before the Special Judge, Chittoor. On 18-10-1957, the Special Judge, Chittor framed charges against the accused and recorded their plea of 'Not Guilty'. He adjourned the case for trial to December, 1957 and recorded the entire evidence. On 15-4-1959, the case was made over to the file of the Special Judge, Secunderabad by proceedings of the High Court dated 31-3-1959. The case of both sides is that the entire evidence was recorded by the Special Judge, Chittoor and that, after the case came to the file of the Special Judge, Secunderabad, the latter asked the prosecution and the accused as to whether they wanted a de novo trial or whether he could proceed to decide the case on the evidence which had already been recorded by the Special Judge, Chittoor and that both sides agreed to the case being decided on the evidence already on record and that accordingly, the Special Judge, Secunderabad, heard the arguments of both sides and pronounced judgment on 23-6-1960.