TMI Blog1932 (12) TMI 8X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d advocate. These parsons have all been tried under Ordinance 2 of 1932, by a special Magistrate, who has convicted them on the charge of conspiracy to commit dacoity and also on a charge under Section 402, I.P.C.-preparation for committing dacoity-and has given them sentences of three years and five years respectively to run concurrently. The case is one in which the approver was examined after t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... oceeded to overtake them and arrested them. So far as regards the appellants with whom we are concerned, the first thing to notice is that, as regards the accused, Majid, no railway ticket was found in his possession; but when the party was arrested, this man attempted to attack the police officer with a dagger until another police officer came to his rescue and prevented it. As regards Mir Billal ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... were given by the different appellants before us were of a vague character and entirely unsupported by any evidence whatsoever. The approver, having been examined before the special Magistrate, gave a long and detailed account of the part played by the different people in the conspiracy. 3. It is quite clear that the appellants before us were known to the approver and the approver to them. It ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... right in coming to the conclusion to which he came and that the appeals so far are to be dismissed. 4. It is right to notice the contention that was put forward to the effect that the proceedings before the special Magistrate were bad. It is said that his having tendered pardon to the approver [Sub-section (2-A), Section 337, Criminal P.C.] made it obligatory upon him to commit the accused for ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the special Magistrate is the Magistrate who, under the Ordinance, is to try the case. Unless therefore we were to bold that no approver could ever give evidence before a special Magistrate, the appellants would not succeed in making the argument logical. But it is quite clear that, in so far as the Ordinance is inconsistent with sub Section (2-A), the Ordinance prevails and there is no ground fo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
