PULUKURI KOTTAYA Vs. EMPEROR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an appeal by special leave against the judgment and order of the High Court of Judicature at Madras, dated 22-10-1945, dismissing an appeal against the judgment and order of the Court of Session, Guntur Division, dated 2-8-1945, whereby the appellants, who were accused 1 to 9, and nine others, were found guilty on charges of rioting and murder. Appellants 1, 2, 3, 4, 7 and 8 were sentenced to death, and appellants 3 to 9 were sentenced to transportation for life. There were other lesser concurrent sentences which need not be noticed. At the conclusion of the arguments their Lordships announced the advice which they would humbly tender to His Majesty, and they now give their reasons for that advice.

(2.) The offence charged was of a type common in many parts of India in which there are factions in a village, and the members of one faction are assaulted by members of the other faction, and, in the prosecution which results, the Crown witnesses belong to the party hostile to the accused; which involves that their evidence requires very careful scrutiny. In the present case the assessors were not prepared to accept the prosecution evidence, but the learned Sessions Judge, whilst taking careful note of the fact that the six eye-witnesses were all hostile to the accused, nevertheless considered that the story which they told was substantially true, and accordingly he convicted the accused. As already noted, this decision was upheld by the High Court in appeal.

(3.) The grounds upon which leave to appeal to His Majesty in Council was granted were two: 1. The failure of the prosecution to supply the defence at the proper time with copies of statements which had been made by important prosecution witnesses during the course of the preliminary police investigation involving, it is alleged, a breach of the express provisions of S. 162, Criminal P. C. 2. The alleged wrongful admission and use in evidence of confessions alleged to have been made whilst in police custody by appellants 3 and 6. This point involves an important question as to the construction of S. 27, Evidence Act, upon which the opinions of High Courts in India are in conflict.