Document Fragment View
Fragment Information
Showing contexts for: misquoting of section in State vs Mangala on 3 April, 1957Matching Fragments
2. We have gone through the record along with the learned counsel for the parties and we are of the opinion that the learned Second Additional Sessions Judge has not only misquoted the statement of the accused and the sections of the Act but he refused to look into the charge and to the note made by the Magistrate on the charge itself when it was read out to the respondent and to which the respondent had pleaded "guilty.
Section 412 of the Code of Criminal Procedure provides that notwithstanding anything contained in the other sections of the Code where an accused person has pleaded guilty and has been convicted by a Magistrate of the first class on such a plea, there shall be no appeal except to the extent or legality of the sentence. The jurisdiction of the Sessions Judge when the appeal was laid before him and had been heard by him extended, in view of Section 412 of the Code, to the question of the extent or the legality of the sentence and not to the question of the conviction.
6. We have now to notice only one other matter in this case. It is that the learned Second Additional Sessions Judge, from the observations made in his judgment, appears to us to have not had the Opium Smoking Act No. III of 1934 before him and he had had before him the Opium Act No. I of 1878, when in the operative portion of his order he criticised the Magistrate for misquoting the section in his charge and order and when he observed that "Section 14 of the Goium Smoking Act does not provide for penalty for contravention of the Act but lays down the rule for search and seizure" and that "Section 9 of the Act will appear to provide for penalty". When he referred to Section 9 and 14 and made these observations he had before him the provisions of the Opium Act of 1878 and not of the Opium Smoking Act of 1939. Section 14 of the Opium Smoking Act, 1934 does provide for penalty. It is Section 14 of the Opium Act of 1878 which provides for entry, arrest and seizure: and it is again Section 9 of the Opium Act of 1878 which provides for penalty for illegal cultivation of poppy etc. The Sessions Judge's criticism of the Magistrate was, therefore, unjustified.