JOGENDRA KUMAR NAG Vs. EMPEROR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) I think this Rule must be made absolute to this extent that the judgment of the Appellate Court, dated the 8th March 1920, so far as it affirms the order passed against the two petitioners Jogendra Kumar Nag and Gopi Krishna Baksi, must be set aside and the case be remitted to that Court for the appeal to be re-heard.

(2.) The objections taken to the judgment of the Appellate Court are two fold, first, in regard to its finding on the matter of association, and secondly, in regard to the evidence which has been admitted into consideration. There were four persons placed on their trial and the matter of association was dealt with very summarily by both the Courts. The first Court remarks: "The association of these accused in order to commit thefts and burglaries has been proved to my satisfaction."

(3.) The Appellate Court says that "their association for the commission of crime has been established. They are close neighbours and they are found to be implicated in a good many cases together." I doubt whether that finding is sufficient to comply with the requirements of paragraph 4 of Section 117 of the Criminal Procedure Code. When the Magistrate re-hears the appeal, the first question which be will have to dispose of is whether the case is one in which it was open to the first Court to try the two accused jointly.