It was translated to accused in Hindi by Sri M. Sukumara Rao, Bench Clerk of this Court who has passed examination in Hindi.
It is necessary to reproduce, at this stage, the charge framed by the VIII Presidency Magistrate against the appellant as well as the judgment pronounced in the case.
The appellant pleaded guilty to the charge and upon that plea he was companyvicted by the Magistrate to rigorous imprisonment for one year and a fine Rs.
Pleads guilty.
The charge reads as follows On 22nd March 1963 at about 8 a.m. at No.
The appellant preferred Criminal Appeal No.
50, in default to rigorous imprisonment for one month.
Appeal from the judgment and order dated April 29, 1963 of the Madras High Court in Criminal Appeal No.
On March 22, 1963 at about 10 a.m. the appellant was arrested by the police and immediately produced before the VIII Presidency Magistrate on the same day on a charge under s. 4 1 a of the Madras Prohibition Act on the allegation that he was in possession of 3,960 grams of Ganja companycealed in a wooden box in the Matam premises without any permit.
The plea of guilty by the accused was also interpreted to the Court by Sri M. Sukumara Rao.
Found guilty.
The allegations companytained in the affidavit are false.
He .also companyplained that he had numbertime to companysult either his lawyer or his disciples, that the proceedings were rushed through with undue haste, that he did number really plead guilty to the charge and that he never understood the implications of the offence or the proceedings before the Magistrate.
On April 23, 1963 the Magistrate submitted a report as follows The particulars of the offence were explained to the accused by the Interpreter.
Kailasam, J. called for a report from the VIII Presidency Magistrate with regard to the allegations made in the affidavit of the appellant.
251 of 1963.
The appellant has been residing in the Matam premises, Elephant Gate, Madras which is a public place of worship.
The appellant filed an affidavit in support of the appeal before the High Court in regard to these allegations.
CIVIL APPELLATE JUIUSDICTION Civil Appeal No.
251 of 1963 affirming the companyviction of the appellant Sri Mahant Kaushalya Das under s. 4 1 a of the Madras Prohibition Act and the sentence of one year Rigorous Imprisonment and a fine of Rs.
C. Agarwala and P. C. Agarwala, for the appellant.
Ranganadham Chetty and A. V. Rangam, for the respon dent.
Hence the charge.
Thereafter Kailasam, J. companyfirmed the companyviction and sentence and dismissed the appeal.
131 of 1963.
The appellant is the hereditary Mahant of Sri Bairaghi Matam a Hindu Religious and Charitable Institution of a monastic nature.
251 of 1963 to the High Court alleging that his eye sight was very bad and defective, that he was an illiterate person, number acquainted with English or Tamil or with any other South Indian language and that he only knew Hindi as it was spoken in Uttar Pradesh.
50 or in default rigorous im prisonment for one month.
134 1 c of the Constitution from a judgment of the Madras High Court dated April 29, 1963 in Criminal Appeal No.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by Ramaswami, J. This appeal is brought by certificate granted under Art.
The judgment by the Magistrate reads as follows Judgment, dated 22nd March 1964 Accused produced.
