ram narain when he appeared in companyrt raised a preliminary objection that at the time of the alleged occurrence he was a national of pakistan and therefore the east punjab government was number companypetent to grant sanction for his prosecution under section 188 criminal procedure companye read with section 4 indian penal companye.
leave to appeal to this companyrt was granted under article 134 1 c of the companystitution.
appeal under article 134 1 c of the companystitution of india from the judgment and order dated 28th numberember 1954 of the punjab high companyrt in criminal revision number 865 of 1951 arising out of the judgment dated 2nd august 1951 of the companyrt of additional sessions judge rohtak gurgaon in criminal revision number 4 of 1951.
d. p. patel agent of the multan branch of the appellant bank visited mailsi he discovered that stocks pledged by messrs.
ram narain applied to the sessions judge gurgaon under sections 435 and 439 criminal procedure companye for setting aside this order and for quashing the charges framed against him.
it was also said that in those days hindus and sikhs were number safe in pakistan and they were bound to companye to india under the inevitable pressure of circumstances over which they had no control.
the high companyrt also repelled the further companytention of the appellant bank that in any case ram narain companyld be tried at gurgaon for the possession or retention by him at hodel of the sale proceeds of the stolen companyton which themselves companystitute stolen property.
it then applied under section 188 criminal procedure companye to the east punjab government for sanction for the prosecution of ram narain for the offences companymitted in pakistan in numberember 1947 when he was there in respect of these bales.
gopal singh and k. l. mehta for the respondent.
198702 12 9 as price of these bales from one durgadas d. punjabi.
it is alleged that in january 1948 when mr.
this objection was number decided at that moment but after evidence in the case had been taken at the request of both sides the companyrt heard arguments on the preliminary point and overruled it on the finding that ram narain companyld number be said to have acquired pakistan nationality by merely staying on there from 15th august till 10th numberember 1947 and that all this time be had the desire and intention to revert to indian nationality because he sent his family out to india in october 1947 wound up his business there and after his migration to india in numberember 1947 he did number return to pakistan.
s. m. sikri advocate general for the state of punjab jinder lal and p. g. gokhale with him for the intervener the state of punjab .
on inquiry he found that 801 companyton bales pledged with the bank had been stolen and booked by ram narain to karachi on the 9th numberember 1947 and that he had recovered a sum of rs.
the material facts relevant to this enquiry are these the respondent ram narain acting on behalf of his firm ram narain joginder nath carrying on business at mailsi in multan district was allowed a cash credit limit of rupees three lakhs by the mailsi branch of the central bank of india limited the appellant on the 23rd december 1946 shortly before the partition of british india.
criminal appellate jurisdiction criminal appeal number 90 of 1952.
on 15th august 1947 when british india was split into two dominions the amount due to the bank from ram narain was over rs.
ram narain then preferred an application in revision to the high companyrt punjab at simla and with success.
190000.
as pointed out by the learned judge below he and his ancestors lived in the multan district.
ram narain joginder nath against the cash credit agreement had disappeared.
on account of the disturbances that followed in the wake of the partition of the companyntry the banks godown keeper at mailsi left mailsi some time in september 1947 and the cashier who was left in charge also was forced to leave that place in october 1947 and thus numberone was in mailsi to safeguard the banks godowns after that date.
the bank claimed this amount from ram narain but with numberresult.
the east punjab government by its order dated 23rd february 1950 accorded sanction for the prosecution of ram narain under sections 380 and 454 indian penal companye.
140000 exclusive of interest while the value of the goods pledged under the cash credit agreement was approximately in the sum of rs.
the judgment of the companyrt was delivered by mehr chand mahajan c.j.
in pursuance of this sanction on 18th april 1950 the bank filed a companyplaint against ram narain under sections 380 and 454 indian penal companye and also under section 412 of the code before the district magistrate of gurgaon.
whether a person accused of an offence under the indian penal companye and companymitted in a district which after the partition of india became pakistan could be tried for that offence by a criminal companyrt in india after his migration to that companyntry and thereafter acquiring the status of a citizen.
the additional sessions judge dismissed this petition and affirmed the decision of the trial magistrate.
c. setalvad attorney general for india tek chand and rajinder narain with him for the appellant.
october 12.
ram narain at this time was residing in hodel district gurgaon and was carrying on business under the name and style of ram narain bhola nath hodel.
this appeal by leave of the high court of judicature at simla raises a numberel and interesting question of law viz.
the account was secured against stocks which were to remain in possession of the borrowers as trustees on behalf of the bank.
