Appeal by special leave from the judgment and order of the Bombay High Court dated 25 2 1972 in criminal appeal No.
The appeal of the only remaining accused, accused No.
The case of the Manager was that he had been forcefully dispossessed by the accused and that certain properties belonging to him and others, including some money, were mis appropriated by the accused.
1, who is the appellant before us by special leave was, however, rejected in limine by the High Court without giving any reasons for the rejection.
M s. M. K. Ramamurthi Co. for the appellant.
However, these are questions relating to the merits of a case in which the Trial Court had acquitted accused numbers 3 to 8 and the High Court acquitted accused No.
N. Shroff and Vineet Kumar, for the respondents.
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Criminal Appeal No.
The appellant claimed to be the owner of a hotel of which Jagannath, companyplainant, was said to be the manager.
The judgment of a Division Bench of the High Court of Bombay in Criminal Appeal No.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by BEG, J. The allegations, on questions of fact raised in the appeal number before us, were quite unusual.
Therefore, the appellant and five others were charged under Section 395 Indian Penal Code as well as under Section 452 read with Section 34 I.P.C. According to the accused, Shri Jagannath and his brother, the companyplainant, were only licensees.
191 of 1971.
On those allegations, it became necessary to companysider whether the accused, who had been put on trial together with six others, was actually in possession of a Hotel.
683 of 1971.
683 of 1971, in respect of companyccused Syed Ali Naki Hade Hasan, who was acquitted on 25 2 1972, shows the nature of the allegations made by the prosecutor in this case.
