MAHADYA Vs. EMPEROR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) SUBHEDAR , A.J.C. 1. The following eight persons were tried by the Additional Sessions Judge, Akola, for an offence under Section 397 read with Section 34, I.P.C: (1) Tankia, (2) Lodya, (3) Rupya, (4) Tukai, (5) Surya, (6) Karkia, (7) Mahadya and (8) Kacharya.

(2.) ON 19th July 1928, the trial resulted in the acquittal of No. 1 and the conviction of the rest of the accused under Section 395, I.P.C.; accused 5 and 7 being below the age of 20 years were given three years' rigorous imprisonment, while each of the others received a sentence of five years' rigorous imprisonment.

(3.) THE learned Government Advocate contends that the appeal is barred by time and that no cause whatsoever having even been alleged by the appellant for condoning the delay under Section 5, Lim. Act, that Court has no power to admit the appeal. In view of the dictum laid down; by the Madras High Court in Janakiramayya v. N. Brahmayya A.I.R. 1925 Mad. 709 this contention seems to be correct. Even under the provisions contained in the new Section 561-A, Criminal P.C., this Court has got no power to entertain an appeal presented beyond the time allowed by the limitation schedule: Gurunath Narayan v. Emperor A.I.R. 1924 Bom. 485.