KUMARAMUTHU PILLAI; EMPEROR Vs. EMPEROR; KUMARAMUTHU PILLAI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These are five connected revision petitions. In Criminal Revision Case No. 351 of 1918, the Public Prosecutor moves this Court for enhancement of the sentences passed upon the five accused, the accused Nos. 3, 4 and 5 being Police Constables while the 1st and 2nd accused are a Sub-Inspector of Police and a Head Constable. The Assistant Sessions Judge of Tinnevelly convicted them under sections 348 and 330 of the Indian Penal Code, and sentenced them to imprisonment till the rising of the Court and to pay fines of Rs. 1,000, 200, 25, 25, 25 respectively. The Sessions Judge on appeal, while confirming the convictions and sentences, remarked at the end that "the sentences for such grave offences are in my opinion wholly inadequate." The revision petition Sled by the Public Prosecutor for enhancement of the sentences had been made to this Court on the 8th July 1918 before the Sessions Judge pronounced his appeal judgment in August 1918. The Sessions Judge says in a note at the end of his judgment that he did not, therefore, make any separate reference on the question of sentences. The other four revision petitions Nos. 574, 601, 695 and 761 are by four of the five accused (that is, excepting the 3rd accused) for setting aside the convictions and sentences both on the merits and on the ground of grave irregularities and illegalities in the trial. As I have come to the conclusion that the joint trial of all the five accused was illegal and ought to be set aside, the question of enhancement of sentences applied for by the Public Prosecutor in No. 351 of 1918 does not arise.

(2.) The facts are very complicated, but it is necessary to detail many of them to render intelligible the grounds for my opinion as to the illegality of the trial.

(3.) On the 27th April 1917, there was a daocity at Kiehiiapuram, a hamlet within the jurisdiction of the Koil patti Police Station. The Probationary Sub-Inspector of Police at Koilpatti Station began the investigation on the 28th April, but on the 30th April he was superseded by the 1st accused who was the Sub-Inspector of Vilatikulam and was placed on special duty to investigate the case. The 2nd accused was the Head Constable at Koilpatti Station and the accused Nos. 3 to 5 are the Police Constables who acted under the orders of the 1st accused in the investigation.