A. No.
of rice.
The present appeals have been preferred by special leave granted by this Court.
Appeal by special leave from the judgment and order dated the 5th December, 1975 of the Andhra Pradesh High Court in Criminal Revision Case No.
31 O 311 of 1975.
Appeals by special leave from the judgment and order dated the 12th April, 1976 of the Andhra Pradesh High Court in Criminal Appeal Nos.
II was invalid, yet they were number mere usurpers but had held office under lawful H authority and therefore, the judgments rendered by them were valid and companyld number be questioned in companylateral proceedings.
In Criminal Appeals Nos.
It was urged that there was numberneed for them to question the appointment of Shri Anjappa or Shri Kaman Raj Saxena as their appointment had already been quashed by the Supreme Court.
The appellant preferred a Criminal Revision Petition before the High Court of Andhra Pradesh.
315 and 316 of 1976, however, the special leave granted by this Court was limited by the order granting leave to the question whether the judgments rendered by Sessions Judges were void where their appointment as Sessions Judges was subsequently declared illegal.
315 and 316 of 1976.
816 of 1974 Criminal Revision Petition No.
234 of 1976 and Shri Phadke, learned companynsel for the appellants in Crl.
302.25 kgs.
Appeals Nos.
By the time the Criminal Revision case filed by Gokaraju Rangaraju and the Criminal Appeals filed by the appellants in Crl.
234 of 1976 arises out of a proceeding under S.6A of the Essential Commodities Act, by which the District Revenue officer West Godavari, Andhra Pradesh, ordered the companyfiscation of Rs.
315 and 316 of 1976 came up for hearing before the High Court of Andhra Pradesh, this Court by its judgment dated 2nd September 1975 quashed the appointment of Shri G. Anjappa, Shri Raman Raj Saxena and two others as District Judges Grade II, on the ground that their appointment was in violation of the provisions of Art.
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Criminal Appeal No.
Appeals Nos.
Thereupon a point was raised in the Criminal Revision case as well as in the Criminal Appeals that the judgments rendered by Shri Anjappa and Shri Raman Raj Saxena were void and required to be set aside.
AND Criminal Appeal Nos.
The High Court overruled the point raised by the present appellants and held that though the appointment of Shri Anjappa and Shri Raman Raj Saxena as District Judges Gr.
233 of the Constitution.
732 of 1974 .
234 of 1976.
Criminal Appeal Nos.
12 of 1975 in the Court of Session, Guntur Division The case was heard and the judgment was pronounced by Shri Raman Raj Saxena, II Additional Sessions Judge, Guntur.
Shri Govindan Nayar learned companynsel for the appellants in Crl.
N. Phadke, and B. Kanta Rao for the Appellant in Crl.
Govindan Nair and A. Subba Rao for the Appellant in Crl.
315 and 316 of 1976 arise out of Sessions Case No.
The appeal was heard by Shri G. Anjappa, Additional Sessions Judge and was rejected.
The appellant, Gokaraju Rangaraju, preferred an appeal under S. 6C of the Essential Commodities Act to the Court of Session, West Godavari.
N. Rao for the Respondent in all the appeals.
Of paddy and Rs.
A. Nos.315 316 of 1976.
203.74 kgs.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by CHINNAPPA REDDY, J. What is the effect of the declaration by the Supreme Court that the appointment of an Additional Sessions Judge was invalid on judgments pronounced by the Judge prior to such declaration is the question for companysideration in these criminal appeals.
The companyvicted accused preferred appeals to the High Court of Andhra Pradesh.
A. No.
