SUR NATH BHADURI Vs. EMPEROR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant, Sur Nath Bhaduri has been convicted in the Court of Sessions at Benares on a charge under Section 191, I.P.C. and has been sentenced to five years rigorous imprisonment. The trial was with a jury, and, according to what is stated, the, jury returned a unanimous verdict of "guilty" of an offence tinder the section just named.

(2.) An appeal from a conviction after trial by a jury is only admissible on points of law. The petition of appeal, which is before me, enumerates eight points. They may, however, be reduced to a smaller number.

(3.) To put the case briefly, this man Sur Nath Bhaduri was charged with the offence known as the fabrication of false evidence. According to the charge as framed by the Magistrate who committed the accused for trial, there was only one charge, namely that this accused had produced a man named Nil Ratan Banerji before the District Magistrate of Benares, to make a false deposition concerning a case of murder. The charge, however, seems to indicate that two other allegations were made against the accused, namely that in order to support the false statement which was intended that this man Nil Ratan should make, the accused fabricated other false evidence, namely by inducing two witnesses named Sita Ram Gond and Shib Chandra Mukerji, to coma forward and make false statements, and that the accused, in order to further his intention in the matter of procuring false evidence planted or caused to be planted a certain weapon in the house of Anant Pergash Thakur. I do not know whether the intention of the Magistrate was that the accused should be indicted on separate charges. All I find is that this charge is described as a charge with one head.