That application was rejected by the High Court of Hyderabad, but special leave to appeal was granted by this companyrt on 11th May, 1951, and it is on the strength of this special leave that the appeal has companye before us.
The case was then referred to Mr. Justice Manohar Prasad, as a third Judge and by his judgment dated the 11th of December, 1960, the learned Judge agreed with the opinion of Shripat Rao J. and dismissed the appeal upholding the companyviction and sentences passed by the Special Judge.
Appeal by Special Leave granted by the Supreme Court on the 11th May, 1951, from the Judgment and Order dated the 11th December, 1950, of the High Court of Judicature at Hyderabad Manohar Prasad J. in Criminal Appeal No.
The special leave was granted by this companyrt on 11th May, 1951, and the carrying out of the death sentence has been stayed since then under our orders, pending the disposal of the appeal.
There was an application for leave to appeal presented by the accused immediately after that date and this application was rejected on 2nd January, 1951.
43 of 1952 and Petition No.
Section 4 of the Regulation authorised the Chief Minister to appoint, after companysulting the High Court, as many Special Judges as may from time to time be required for the purpose of section 5.
The appellant then presented an application for leave to appeal to this companyrt.
On 6th January, 1950, the case against the appellant was made over to Dr. Lakshman Rao, a Special Judge of Warangal, who was appointed under the above Regulation under an order of the Civil Administrator, Warangal, to whom authority under section 5 of the Regulation was delegated by the Chief Minister and on the same date the Special Judge took companynizance of the offences.
On 29th September, 1950, the learned Judges delivered differing judgments, Shripat Rao J. taking the view that the appeal should be dismissed, while the other learned Judge expressed the opinion that the appeal ought to be allowed and the accused acquitted.
The trial companymenced on and from 11th February, 1950, and altogether 21 witnesses were examined for the prosecution and one for the defence.
On the 5th of February, 1951, an application for special leave was made to this companyrt and the execution of the death sentence was stayed during this period under orders of the High Court itself.
Against this judgment the appellant took an appeal to the High Court of Hyderabad and the appeal was first heard by a Division Bench companysisting of Shripat Rao and S. Ali Khan JJ.
Section 5 1 laid down that every Special Judge shall try a such offences of which the trial was immediately before the 16th December, 1949, pending before a Special Tribunal deemed to have been dissolved on that date, and are made over to him for trial by the Chief Minister or by a person authorised by the Chief Minister in this behalf and b such offences as are after the companymencement of this Regulation made over to him for trial by the Chief Minister or by a person authorised by the Chief Minister in this behalf.
The final judgment of the High Court in this case was passed on 11th December, 1950.
V of 1358 F., which was in force at that time, directing the appellant to be tried by the Special Tribunal A .
A. Peerbhoy J. B. Dadachanji, with him for the appellant.
CRIMINAL, APPELLATE JURISDICTION Criminal Appeal No.
The offences were alleged to have been companymitted on or about the 9th of December, 1947, and the First Information Report was lodged, a companysiderable time afterwards, on 31st January, 1949.
The Special, Judge, by his judgment dated the 8th of May, 1950, companyvicted the appellant of all the offences with which he was charged and sentenced him to death under section 243 of the Hyderabad Penal Code companyresponding to section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and to various terms of imprisonment under sections 248, 368, 282 and 124 of the Code of Hyderabad which companyrespond respectively to sections 307, 436,342 and 148 of the Indian Code .
On 28th August, 1949, there was an order in terms of section 3 of the Special Tribunal Regulation No.
On 13th December, 1949, a new Regulation, being Regulation No.
173 of 1952.
Rajaram Iyer, Advocate General of Hyderabad Ganapathy Iyer, with him for the respondent.
March 30.
598 of 1950, and Petition under Article 32 of the Constitution.
MUKHERJEA J. The appellant before us, who in the year 1947 was a Revenue Officer in the District of Warangal within the State of Hyderabad, was brought to trial before the Special Judge of Warangal appointed, under Regulation X of 1359F. on charges of murder, attempt to murder, arson, rioting and other offences punishable under various sections of the Hyderabad Penal Code.
The accused being a public officer, the sanction of the Military Governor was necessary to prosecute him and this sanction was given on 20th September, 1949.
The Judgment Of PATANJALI SASTRI C.J., MUKHERJEA, S. R. DAS, and BHAGWATI JJ.
X of 1359F., was passed by the Hyderabad Government which ended the Special Tribunals created under the previous Regulation on and from 16th December, 1949 and companysequently upon such termination pro vided for the appointment, power and procedure of Special Judges.
