AKHLAKALI HAYATALLI v. THE STATE OF BOMBAY.
Citation: [1954] 1 S.C.R. 435; 1953 INSC 84
Court: Supreme Court of India
Bench: BIJAN KUMAR MUKHERJEA , NATWARLAL HARILAL BHAGWATI
Judgment date:
Case summary
1953 INSC 84. Supreme Court of India judgment dated 1953-12-09. AKHLAKALI HAYATALLI v. THE STATE OF BOMBAY. Read the judgment and case details on LawSphereX.
Judgment text
) S. C. lt. SUPREME COURT REPORTS 435 The court-fees ·payable to tile Government will come out of defendant No. 1 in this case. We certify for two counsel and an agent in this appeal. Appeal allowecl. Agent for the appellant: J. 11. S. K. Sastri. Agent for the respondent : Nau nit Lal. AKHLAKALl HAYATALLI v. THE STATE O:F BOMBAY. [B. K. MuKHERJEA arid N. H. BHAGWA'rI JJ. ] Criminal Proced·urc Code (V of 1898 as amended), -ll. 807-Re- ference to High Oo1irt-Propcr approach-J,ury-Sole Judges of facts-Provided verdict co1dd be arrived cit by reasonable body of men. The proper method of approach in the matters of references under s. 307 of the Criminal Procedure Code as finally settled is that the High Court will only interfere with the verdict of the jury if it finds the verdict perverse in the sense of being unreason- able, manifestly wrong or against the weight of evidence.
If the facts and circumstances of the case are such that a reasonable body of men could arrive at one conclusion or the other, it is not competent to the Sessions Judge or the High Court to substitute their verdict in place of the verdict which has been given by the jury. The jury are the sole judges of the facts and it is the right of the accused to have the benefit of the verdict of the jury. Even if the Sessions Judge or the High Court would, if left to themselves, have anived at a different verdict, it is not com- petent to the Sessions Judge to make a reference nor ta the F,[igh Comt to accept the same and substitute their own verdict for the verdict of the jury provided the verdict was such as could be arriv- ed at by a reasonable body of men on the facts and circumstances of the case. · Ramamtgrah Singh v. Emperor (A. I. R. 1946 P. C. - 151) referred to. CRIMINAL APPELLA'l'E JURISDICTION. Criminal Appeal No. 76 of 1953. ...
, Appear by special leave against the Judgment and Order dated the 16th June, 1952, of the High Court of Judicature at Bombay in Criminal Jury Reference No. 58 of 1952. 19/ii! Ohilukuri V enkateswarl u v. Ohilukuri Venkatanarayana 191i3 Dec. 9. ' S. C. R. SUPREME COURT . REPORTS 437 on the right arm pit, on the front sid~ of the shirt and on the right thigh. There were-_ also blood stains on the right side collar and on the back of the shirt. · The defence put up by the appellant was that he was a fruit broker and after collecting his dues from the Crawford market up to 11 p. m. , he came to the corner of Dhobi Street, when he heard the · shouts, "chor, chor" and he also then shouted "chor, chor" and ran after the person who was running away. in order to catch him. When he reached the junction of Nagdevi Cross Street he fell down and the . person who. was rulJiling ahead of him rushed into a gutter.
As he was ·ahead and members of the public were following him, three or four of them fell on his body after c he fell down and when he got up he was caught by two or three other persons who all said that . he was the man. Sub-Inspector Chawan was one · of these ·J? Crsons. Chawan was suspected to be his accomplice, but some- one said that· he was a police officer and Chawan was then released. The appellant was put Into . the police ·pilot car which • came along and taken to the police station. l{e was then taken to the scene of the offence and a panchnaina was drawn there. He was again brought to the police station thereafter and was_ made to sit in the charge room. As he was feeling very hot, he removed his shirt and kept it by his side. In the meanwhile, a police constable came there and gave him a blow on his nose saying, "Do you think this is . your father's residence that you removed your shirt?
" He thereupon garted bleeding from his nose, and due to that bleeding his shirt and trousers were stained with blood. The same constable then asked him to put on the clothes and took him to his officer. He produced the appellant before. D. I. Kakatkar who there noticed his clothes. The panchas . were then called and a panchnama was drawn up in . which the blood stains on the shirt and trousers were noted. The appellant was tried by the Additional Sessions Judge and a common jury. The prosecution called the evidence of the complainant. Abdul Satar, Babu Adam and Sub-Inspector Chawan. Evidence was led of an identification parade which was held in the 6-93 S. C. lndia/59 · 1953 Akhlakali Ha. Jatalli . v. . Th Stat• of Bomb \Ve are of the opinion that this is the correct method of approach in references under section 307 of the Criminal . Procedure Code.
If the facts and circum- stances of the case are such that a reasonable body of men could arrive at the one conclusion or the other, it is not competent to the Sessions Judge or the High Court to substitute their verdict in place of the verdict which has been given by the jury. The jury are the sole judges of the facts and it is the right of the accus- ed to have the benefit of the verdict of the jury. Even if the Sessions Judge or the High Court would if left to themselves have arrived at a different verdict it is not competent to the Sessions Judge to make a refer- ence nor to the High Court to accept the same and substitute their own verdict for the verdict of the jury provided the verdict was such as could be arrived at by a reasonable body of men on the facts and circum- stances of the case.
Having regard to the position which we have set out above we are clearly of the opinion that on the facts and circumstances of the case before us there were enough materials before the jury which would enable the jury to come to one conclusion or the other in regard to the criminality of the appellant. Six out of the nine jurors came to the conclusion that the appellant was not guilty of the offence with which he was charg- ed. Three out of the nine jurors came to an opposite conclusion and it is impossible in the circumstances of the case for us to characterise the one or the other of the conclusions reached by the members of the jury as perverse in the sense of being unreasonable or mani- festly wrong or against the weight of evidence. The verdict reached by the m~jority was certainly a verdict which upon the evidence on record a reasonable body of men could have reached and in our opinion the reference was not competent.
The result therefore is that the appeal will be allow- ed, the judgment of the High Court on reference set aside, th. e majority verdict of the jury Pronouncing the appellant not guilty of the offence with which he was 1953 Akhla/rflli Hayatoili v. Th6 Stat~ of Bombay. BhagwatiJ. 1953 Akhlakali Ha. Jatalli v. Th•Stateof Bombtg. 1953 Dec. 18. SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1954] charged accepted and the appellant acquitted and discharged and forthwith set at liberty. Appeal dllowed. Agent for the respondent : G. H. Rajadhyaksha. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX/EXCESS PROFITS TAX, BOMBAY CITY v. MESSRS. BHOGILAL LAHERCHAND including BATLIBOI & CO. , BOMBAY. [MEHR CHAND MAHAJAN, S. R. DAs, GHULAM HASAN and JAGANNADHADAS JJ. ] Indian Income-tax Act (XI of 1922), s. 42(1)-Scope of. A Hindu undivided family was carrying on business in Bom- bay, Madras and the Mysore State, being treated as a single asses- see and its relevant accounting period was 10th October, 1941, to 8th November, 1942.
During this period, the Mysore branch purchased goods from the Bombay head office and the Madras branch of the value of Rs. 2 lakhs odd. The Income- tax Officer estimated these purchases of the Mysore branch in British India at Rs. 3 lakhs and its profits at Rs. 75,000 on the sale of these goods )n Mysore. In view of the provisions of s. 42 of the Indian Income-tax Act, half of this profit, i. e. , to the extent of Rs. 37,500, was deemed to accrue or arise in British India because of the business connection of the non-resid~ ent branch in British India : Held, that, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the In- come-tax Officer was right in applying the provisions of s. 42 (1) of the Income-tax Act and holding that Rs. 37,500 were profits deemed to accrue in British India and in including in the assess~ ment a portion thereof. Held also, that s. 42 sub-ss. (! ) and (3), cover cases of both residents as well as non-residents. Commissioner of Income-tax v.
Western India Life Insurance Co. [1945] (13 LT. R. 405) dissented from. Sutlej Cotton Mills Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income-tax, West Bengal (A. LR. 1950 Cal. 551), Commissioner of Income-tax/Excess Profits Tax, Madras v. Parasu- ram /ethanand (A. LR. 1950 Mad. 631), Commissioner of Income-tax. Bombay v. Ahmedb}iai Umarbhai & Co. ( [ 1950] S. C. R. 335), referred to.
Source: Supreme Court eSCR. Dataset: Dattam Labs, CC BY 4.0. Text extracted automatically; compare with the source PDF for layout and accuracy.