SANGAMMA NAICK Vs. EMPEROR; PERUMAL NAICK

JUDGEMENT

(1.) There was clear evidence against 1st accused who is dead, and the order against him will not be set aside.

(2.) There is, no doubt, some evidence against some of the other accused persons and perhaps against all, but it is not strong in any case, and I find it impossible to ascertain from the District Magistrate s order what, he considers, is proved as against any particular person.

(3.) The order of the Court of first instance is at least as much lacking in precision. The Magistrate, accepting the prosecution witnesses as trustworthy, says that they depose that all the accused collect in the 1st accused s house and are maintained by him, and to meet other expenses he levied kaval fees. If that is all there is, obviously it is no evidence sufficient to make out any of the charges against any but the 1st accused. There is, however, other evidence of a somewhat vague nature that the 1st accused used the others for purposes of committing crimes and I take it that it is on this that the 1st class Magistrate relies.