Barjoo Mahto and others vs Emperor

Luby, J.—This is an application for revision by Barjoo, Mahto and eight others who have been convicted under S. 379, Penal Code, and sentenced to two months'' rigorous imprisonment and fines of Rs. 50 each or in default one month''s rigorous imprisonment by a Magistrate with second class powers at Purulia. On appeal, the Deputy Commissioner of Manbhum has dismissed the appeal but reduced the sentences to fines of Rs. 30 each, in default rigorous imprisonment for thirty days. I am surprised to find that the judgment of the Second Class Magistrate does not even mention the names of all the accused, persons who in he has convicted; nor has he summed up the evidence marshalled against each accused, as required by law. Turning to the Deputy Commissioner''s judgment. I find that he has given no reasons for his decision, but has simply noted: "Heard. I see no reason to interfere." This was not a sufficient compliance with the requirements of S. 421. Civil P.C., in a case where both oral and documentary evidence had been produced by both sides and where the memorandum of appeal contained a number of grounds that admitted of argument. I think that this appeal must be remanded for re-hearing. I therefore set aside the Deputy Commissioner''s order and remand the appeal to him for re-hearing and disposal according to law.