LAWS(CAL)-1953-3-24

MAHOMED YUSUF Vs. STATE

Decided On March 30, 1953
Mahomed Yusuf Appellant
V/S
STATE Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Rule involves the interpretation of Section 337 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

(2.) The facts which led to the making of this application were as follows: On January 2, 1952, the Petitioner and several others were arrested by the police upon charges under Sections 420/ 467/ 471/ 120B and 403/ 34 of the Indian Penal Code. Shortly thereafter, the Petitioner made a confession before a Magistrate. In the course of the enquiry, the Petitioner prayed for pardon by a written application in which he made a full disclosure of his own acts and those of his co-accused in the commission of the offences alleged against them. The Petitioner's confession previously made before a Magistrate was then duly proved and the learned Magistrate making the enquiry tendered pardon to the Petitioner under Section 337 of the Code. Thereafter, the Petitioner was examined as a witness for the prosecution. After he had been cross-examined, the learned Magistrate considered the evidence in the case, oral as well as documentary, and came to the conclusion that it did not disclose any offence triable exclusively by the High Court or court of sessions, or any other offence which came within the ambit of Section 337. Accordingly, the learned Magistrate purported to revoke the pardon tendered to the Petitioner and ordered that his evidence be expunged from the record. The learned Magistrate then framed a charge under Section 120B read with Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code against the Petitioner and several others. It was at this stage that the Petitioner moved this Court and obtained this Rule.

(3.) Two questions fall to be determined (i) whether in the circumstances disclosed, the learned Magistrate had jurisdiction to tender pardon to the Petitioner, and (ii) whether he could revoke it except under the provisions of Section 339 of the Code.