Posted On by &filed under Allahabad High Court, High Court.

Allahabad High Court
Emperor vs Barhma Singh on 26 March, 1926
Equivalent citations: 97 Ind Cas 361
Author: Sulaiman
Bench: Sulaiman


Sulaiman, J.

1. The accused was charged with an offence under Section 397, Indian Penal Code, and an enquiry in the learned Magistrate’s Court resulted in a commitment to the Sessions Court. The learned Magistrate under Section 341, Cr.P.C., reported to this Court that the accused was not capable of making his defence in Court, but that he was not insane. I directed that the sessions trial should proceed and an attempt should be made to explain the proceedings to the accused, and even if it appeared that he did not understand the proceedings the trial should proceed and if it resulted in a conviction, a further report should be made to the High Court. I also suggested that if in the course of the trial the learned Sessions Judge had any ground for suspecting that the accused was of unsound mind, he should make an enquiry into the matter under Chap. XXXIV of the Cr.P.C.

2. The trial has been concluded and the Jury have returned a unanimous verdict of ‘guilty.’ They have further found that the accused was able to understand the proceedings in Court. The learned Assistant Sessions Judge agreed with the verdict of the Jury and also thought that the accused was able to follow the proceedings in Court and has remarked that nothing unusual has been noticed in his behaviour during the trial. The learned Assistant Sessions Judge has not recorded a formal order convicting the accused under Section 397, nor has he sentenced him.

3. Although the report has come to me probably in pursuance of my previous order, it is quite clear that this is not a report under Section 341, Cr.P.C. Under that section it is only when the accused, though not insane, cannot be made to understand the proceedings and the trial results in a conviction, that the proceedings are to be forwarded to the High Court with a report of the circumstances for the High Court to pass such orders as it thinks fit. In the present case, when the Jury found and the learned Assistant Sessions Judge agreed with the Jury that the accused was able to follow the proceedings in Court and to understand the same, it was the duty of the Assistant Sessions Judge to convict the accused of the offence with which he was charged and to pass a sentence on him in accordance with law. He cannot leave the question of conviction and sentence in this particular case to the High Court. I, in fact, would have no jurisdiction to record the conviction of the accused or to pass a sentence on him, the case not falling under Section 341 of the Cr.P.C.

4. I, accordingly, direct that the record be returned to the Assistant Sessions Judge with the direction that he should pass the necessary orders himself.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

* Copy This Password *

* Type Or Paste Password Here *

109 queries in 0.189 seconds.