Sheikh Rijhu and Others vs Emperor

Rowland, J.—The petitioners who had been convicted of rioting and of causing hurt by a Magistrate of the First Class appealed to the Court of the Sessions Judge (Judicial Commissioner of Ranchi). The order passed on the petition of appeal was that it was admitted on the question of sentence only.

On the appeal coming up for hearing the learned Judicial Commissioner wrote a judgment in which he stated the facts and proceeded to consider the question of sentence only. This rule has been granted on the ground that this procedure is not in accordance with law. When an appeal is admitted it must be dealt with as a whole and it has been held by the Calcutta High Court in Nafar Sheikh Vs. Emperor, that an appeal cannot be admitted on the limited ground of sentence only; if it is admitted at all the whole appeal must he heard. This view was followed in Gaya Singh v. Emperor AIR 1925 Pat. 453. In these cases the proposition may be stated somewhat broadly and without reference to the obvious exception created by Section 412 of the Code for cases in which there is no appeal except as to the extent or legality of the sentence. No doubt the decisions must be read as not applying to oases of that class; but this is not one of such eases. Accordingly I must make the rule absolute and set aside the order of the Sessions Judge dismissing the appeal and direct him to rehear the whole appeal in accordance with law.