MICHAEL Vs. STATE OF M P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant Michael has been convicted under Sections 363 and 366, Indian Penal Code, and sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for one year and three years respectively thereunder.

(2.) The trial was by jury. Seven jurors constituted the jury. The case of the appellant in appeal, apart from other grounds, is that out of seven jurors, four did not know and understand English language. The charge to the jury was read out by the learned Additional Sessions Judge in English and it was not translated completely into Hindi and read out to the jurors who did not understand English. An affidavit was filed in this connection, by the appellant. I had asked the State to reply to the points raised in the affidavit. I find that the reply is not a categorical denial of the allegations mentioned in the affidavit. I, therefore, summoned the four jurors to appear before me. Out of them, three appeared. The summons against the fourth was not received and the counsel for the appellant gave her up. Therefore, only three jurors were examined in the Court.

(3.) Sk. Adam dearly stated that he does not know English and the Court read out the charge in English. Kasturilal stated that he knows Only Urdu and had studied upto VI standard. He does not know even Hindi properly. He comes from village Dhermond, district Camelpur, which is now in West Pakistan. According to him, the Additional Sessions Judge explained the case in Hindi, but the whole thing was not explained. The charge was read in English and he could know the facts of the case only from the statements of the witnesses. The other juror Sitaram also comes from Rawalpindi. He Came to Jabalpur after the partition of India. He had studied Urdu upto VIIIth standard and does not know Hindi properly. He does not know English at all. According to him, the charge was read out in English. Though it was explained in Hindi, but according to him, he did not follow it fully. He stated that when the verdict was given, he gave his opinion according to the wishes of the other jurors. He could not form any opinion himself. It is thus clear that the charge was read over in English. It was explained to the jurors in Hindi only in part and two of the jurors were not conversant with Hindi properly. The four jurors do not know English at all.