EMPEROR Vs. MAHAMADBUKSH KARIMBUKSH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal has been preferred by nine persons convicted at a trial conducted by the Sessions Judge, Belgaum, with the aid of a Jury of the offence of dacoity, Section 395, Indian Penal Code, and sentenced each to seven years rigorous imprisonment.

(2.) A report has been called for from the Sessions Judge on the following points: - (1) Whether any and what objection was taken to the commitment on the ground that the proviso to Section 188, Criminal Procedure Code, had not been observed, and if so, at what stage of the trial and under what circumstances was the objection taken. (2) Did the Sessions Judge accept the commitment under Section 532, Criminal Procedure Code, and if so, was this done after perusal of the proceedings as required by that section ? And did the Sessions Judge consider the accused had not been injured by the commitment ? (3) Are there any further remarks or explanation that the Sessions Judge desires to make or furnish in reference to the points raised ?

(3.) The Sessions Judge has reported that no objection with respect to the Political Agent's certificate was taken during the first seven days of the trial; and as to the second point he considered the commitment regular and that no application was made to him to say whether the commitment was regular or irregular and if the latter whether he would accept it under Section 532, Criminal Procedure Code. He further says that even if the application had been made he should certainly have accepted the commitment under that section, even if that commitment was irregular, but that the commitment appeared regular and that he considered that the accused had not been in any way injured by the commitment and that the objection was purely technical.