9911796707
TMI Blog1974 (8) TMI 117X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the register of petition duly filled in by the Jail Superintendent. This judgment would dispose of all the three petitions. The petitioner was tried in the court of Shri P. K. Gupte, Judge, City Civil and Sessions Court, Greater Bombay for offences under sections 392 and 397 Indian Penal Code. The petitioner was found guilty of those offences and was sentenced as per judgment dated May 12, 1972 to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of seven years. The petitioner after his conviction was for some time kept in Aurangabad jail and was thereafter transferred to Nagpur Central Prison. He is now undergoing the sentence of imprisonment in that prison. According to the petitioner, he asked for the copy of the of the judgment at the time it was pronounced, but he was informed that the same would be sent to him through jail authorities. The petitioner thereafter asked the jail authorities to get a copy of the judgment so as to enable him to file an appeal. The jail authorities informed the petitioner that they had sent a number of communications and despite that, copy of the judgment was not yet available. The petitioner thereupon sent petition No. 1523 of 1973 from jail on Jan ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d left it to the Sheristedar should not introduce an infirmity in the procedure adopted by him, The Sheristedar in the very nature of things must have translated to the petitioner what was contained in the concluding part of the judgment. It was, in our opinion,'the dictation of the concluding part of the judgment in open court by the learned Sessions Judge which should in the circumstances be taken to be tantamount to the pronouncement of the judgment. The main contention which has been advanced by Mr. Dhingra is that it was essential for the learned Sessions Judge to have signed the judgment at the time it was pronounced. The fact that the judgment had been dictated but had not been transcribed did not, according to Mr. Dhingra, justify a departure from the procedural requirement of signing the judgment at the time of its pronouncement. in this respect we find that according to clause (1) of section 366 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the judgment in every trial iii. any Criminal Court of original jurisdiction shall be pronounced or the substance of such judgment shall be explained in open court either immediately after the termination of the trial or at some subsequent time ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... out delay after pronouncement, As it is we find that in the present case the copy of the judgment was not supplied to the accused till February 19, 1973. The above delay of more than nine months in the supply of copy of the judgment of the trial court discloses, in our opinion, a rather depressing state of affairs. If the judgment had been dictated by the time it was pronounced on May 12, 1972, it should not have taken more than a few days to transcribe the same and supply a copy of it to the accused. A delay of more than nine months in the supply of the copy of the judgment is wholly unjustified. We are given to understand that paucity of staff is mainly instrumental for the delay in the transcribing of the judgment and the supply of its copy. If so, the sooner this situation is remedied the better. Many an accused on being convicted and sent to jail by the trial court go up in appeal and apply for bail. According to section 419 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, every appeal shall be made in the form of a petition in writing presented by the appellant or his pleader, and every such petition shall (unless the Court to which it is presented otherwise directs) be accompanied by a co ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r during trial or in any inquiry or other proceedings under this Code, unless such error, omission, irregularity has in fact occasioned a failure of justice. This section is designed to ensure that no order of a competent court should in the absence of failure of justice be reversed or altered in appeal or revision on account of a procedural irregularity. The Code' of Criminal Procedure is essentially a Code of procedure and like. all procedural law, is designed to further the ends of justice and not frustrate them by the introduction of endless technicalities. At the same time it has to be borne in mind that it is procedure that spells much of the difference between rule of law and rule by him and caprice. The object of the Code is to ensure for the accused a full and fair trial, in accordance with the principles of natural justice. If there be substantial compliance with the requirements of law, a mere procedural irregularity would not vitiate the trial unless the same results in miscarriage of justice. In all procedural laws certain things are vital. Disregard of the provisions in respect of them would prove fatal to the trial and would invalidate the conviction. There are, how ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e who has gone on leave before signing the judgment may call for more comment, but even so the convenience of the Court and the interest of the litigants must prevail. The defect is merely an irregularity." Reference in the above context was made to the provisions of section 99 of the Code of Civil Procedure, according to which no decree shall be reversed or substantially varied nor shall any case be remanded in appeal on account of any error, defect or irregularity in any proceedings in the suit not affecting the merits of the case or the jurisdiction of the Court. Although the above section dealt with appeals from original decrees, section 108 applied the same provisions to the appeals from appellate decrees. The'Judicial Committee came to the conclusion that the defect mentioned above was an irregularity not affecting the merits of the case or the jurisdiction of the court and was no ground for setting aside the decree. The above decision was referred to by this Court in the case of Surendra Singh & Ors v. The State of Uttar Pradesh and it was observed that section 537 of the Code of Criminal Procedure does as much the same thing on the criminal side as sections 99 and 1 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ect is concerned, we find that the judgment was ultimately transcribed and was signed by the learned Sessions Judge. The appellant was there after supplied a copy of the judgment and he filed an appeal against the judgment of the trial court. The appeal was dismissed by the Bombay High Court on September 13, 1973. In case the appellant felt aggrieved against the procedural irregularity mentioned above, the appellant should have agitated that point in appeal before the High Court. The fact that the appeal of the appellant, was dismissed shows that either the appellant did not agitate that point in appeal before the High Court or in case he did so, the High Court found no substance therein. It cannot in. the circumstances be said that the procedural irregularity mentioned above has occasioned failure of justice. As the judgment of the learned Sessions Judge has been affirmed on appeal by the High Court and the appeal of the appellant has been dismissed, the appellant, in our opinion, cannot be said to be kept in prison without the authority of law. The appellant indeed is undergoing the sentence of imprisonment which was awared to him by the learned Sessions Judge in the case under s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n received by post and was not accompanied by a copy of the register of petition duly filled in by the Jail Superintendent. The Registrar in this context relied upon Rule 1416 of Chapter XXXIX of the Bombay Jail Manual (1955 Edition) which reads as under : "A petition of appeal or an application for revision addressed or purporting to be addressed to the High Court, Bombay or a petition of appeal or an application for special leave to appeal so addressed to the Supreme Court of India by a prisoner shall together with the accompanying documents be forwarded in a sealed envelope by the superintendent with the utmost expedition to the Registrar, High Court, Bombay or the Registrar, Supreme Court of India, New Delhi, as the case may be. The Superintendent shall at the same time forward a copy of such petition or application to the Inspector General of Prisons." It was also stated by the Registrar that Rule 25 of Chapter XXXVI of the Bombay High Court Appellate Side Rules, 1960 required that an application from a petitioner should be accompanied by a copy of the register of the petition duly filled in by the Jail Superintendent. The petitioner has challenged the order of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
