HAFIZ NEHAL AHMAD Vs. RAMJI DAS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These appeals Nos. 906-920 are appeals under Section 476-B of the Criminal Procedure Code filed by one Nehal Ahmad who has since died.

(2.) It appears that several people were prosecuted on a charge of dacoity at Saharanpur, the case being one of the now notorious Saharanpur riot cases. The learned Sessions Judge acquitted some of the accused persons and convicted others, Nehal Ahmad was one of the persons who was prosecuted and acquitted. On his acquittal Nehal Ahmad presented sixteen petitions before the learned Sessions Judge asking the Court to take action under Section 476 of the Criminal Procedure Code and to file a complaint for the prosecution of the witnesses for the prosecution. The learned Sessions Judge took action against only one viz., Badri Das, who has filed an appeal No. 695 of 1924. He dismissed the application against the rest. Nehal Ahmad came up to this Court in appeal.

(3.) Nehal Ahmad is dead and with his death the power which he gave to Mr. A. Aziz, Vakil, to prosecute the case on his behalf came to an end. Mr. Aziz, yesterday, mentioned these cases, and stated that it was possible that he would be able to show that without a vakalatnama he was entitled to argue the appeals. His argument seemed to be that it was after all the duty of the Court to take up the prosecution and any member of the public could represent matters before an appellate Court. Mr. Aziz told the Court that he was going away and asked for a postponement. Mr. Nehal Chand the learned Counsel appearing for the opposite parties, objected to a postponement on the ground that his clients were already here and waiting for the disposal of the appeals. Mr. Aziz was, therefore, told that if he was going away he should hand over his brief (if indeed any brief is left) with a brother practitioner to argue the point if he was so advised, Evidently Mr. Aziz left no instructions; for nobody is appearing to-day on behalf of his client.