EMPEROR Vs. CERING

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellants-accused and the original accused No. 8 were tried jointly before the Sessions Court at Belgaum, accused Nos. 1, 2 and 8 on charges under Secs.120 B, 161 and 163 Indian Penal Code, and accused Nos. 4 to 10 on charges under Section 120B, 161, 163 and 114, Indian Penal Code. The jury unanimously found accused Nos. 1 and 2 guilty on all charges, and accused No. 3 guilty on charges under Rs. 120B and 161. The jury by a majority of three to two found accused No. 3 guilty under Section 163, Indian Penal Code, and accused Nos. 4 to 7 and 9 and 10 guilty on all charges; the jury found accused No. 8 by a majority of four to one not guilty of any offence. The Sessions Judge accepted the verdict of the jury, acquitted accused No. 8, and sentenced the remaining accused to various terms of imprisonment and fines.

(2.) The appellants have urged that the trial was vitiated owing to (1) a misjoinder of charges and parties accused; (2) certain misdirections and non-directions amounting to misdirections to be found in the learned Judge's charge to the jury; (3) wrongful admission of certain matters in evidence; (4) refusal by the learned Judge to allow accused No. 1 to annex to his written statement at his trial a synopsis of his service record in the police force.

(3.) The charges framed at the trial were as follows:- That between 28-8-1926 and 1-12.1926 at Belgaum and at Jugul (1) yon accused I to 3 agreed together to receive a gratification other than legal remuneration from both the parties concerned in the complaint of Sanmalappa Narsappa ftaik against accused Nos. 4 to 9 and Adiveppa Mai-gauda, (2) that in pursuance of the said conspiracy, each of you accused 1 to 3, being public servants in the Police Department, accepted such illegal gratification in the shape of Rs. 500, Rs. 200 and Rs. 200 respectively from the said Sanmalappa, as a motive for yourself showing favour to him or for inducing the others among you by the exercise of personal influence to show favour to the said Sanmalappa in the exercise of official functions. (3) that further in pursuance of the said conspiracy you accused No. 3 accepted for yourself and for accused 1 and 2 such illegal gratification in the shape of Bs 1000 in cash from accused 4 to 10 and Adiveppa Malgauda as a motive for showing favour in the exercise of official functions to accused 4 to 9 and Adiveppa in respect of the said complaint filed by the said Sanmalappa. (4) that you accused 4 to 10 agreed together to offer gratification other than legal remuneration to accused 1 to 3 as a motive for showing in the exercise of official functions favour to accused 4 to 9 and Adiveppa in respect of the said complaint either personally or by inducing one another among these three accused by exercising personal influence and actually paid Rs. 1000 to accused No. 3 in pursuance of the said conspiracy and that thereby, accused 1 to 3 committed offences punishable under Secs.120B, 161, and 163 of the I.P.C., and accused 4 to 10 committed offences punishable under Secs.120B, 161, 163 arid 114 of the I.P.C. and within the cognizance of the Court of Session of Belgaum.