Judgement

Appeal by special leave from a judgment of the Court of the Judicial Commissioner (April 19, 1916) affirming the judgment of the Sessions Court of Jubbulpore, by which the appellant was convicted of murder, and confirming the sentence of death pronounced.

The facts of the case are fully stated in the judgment of their Lordships.

1917. Feb. 5, 6, 7, 8. De Gruyther, K.C., Parikh, and J. N. Misra, for the appellant. The appellate Court, and to some extent the Sessions Judge, used the police diaries to point out discrepancies in the evidence for the defence. That was clearly contrary to s. 172, sub-s. 2, of the Code of Criminal Procedure and improper Queen-Empress v. Mannu. (I. L. R. 19 Allah. 390.) The decision of the appellate Court was influenced by that irregularity, and it is impossible to say that in its absence the Court would have come to the same conclusion. The proceedings should therefore be set aside In re Dillett (( 1887) 12 App. Cas. 459.); Vaithinatha Pillai v. King-Emperor (( 1913) L. R. 40 Ind. Ap. 193.); Arnold v. King-Emperor, (( 1914) L. R. 41 Ind. Ap. 149, 173.) The confirmation of the sentence stands upon a different footing from the conviction. Under 8.