T C S MARTINDALE Vs. EMPEROR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant T.C.S. Martindale was committed for trial by a Presidency Magistrate and tried at the High Court Sessions before Mr. Justice Pearson, on three charges relating to forgery, and one charge of cheating. We are told that the majority of the jurors consisted of Europeans; but that result was achieved by process of challenging, and not as a consequence of the provisions contained in Section 275 of the Criminal Procedure Code. He was found guilty on all the charges, by a verdict of seven to two on the forgery charge, and unanimously on the charge of cheating. He was sentenced to four years rigorous imprisonment on each charge, the sentences to run concurrently.

(2.) Some time later, the Chief Justice was moved to appoint a Bench to hear his application for leave to appeal. The matter was referred to the Criminal Bench (then consisting of Newbould and B.B. Ghose, JJ.,) and leave was granted under Section 449 (1) (c), one of the new clauses added by last year's amending Act.

(3.) The learned Standing Counsel has appeared before us and urged that no appeal lies, and that the application for leave should have been made with notice to the Crown, and that it should have been made to Mr. Justice Pearson, the Judge who tried the case.