Supreme Court affirms convictions in challenge to trial jurisdiction and evidence admissibility under Section 149 IPC

The Supreme Court upheld the convictions and sentences of the appellants in a case involving challenges to the trial jurisdiction, admissibility of evidence, and convictions under Section 149 IPC. The Court found the trial transfer valid for administrative reasons, allowed the prosecution witnesses' evidence, and affirmed the convictions based on evidence of participation in an unlawful assembly. The appeals were dismissed, with the Court rejecting jurisdictional challenges, evidentiary objections, and the plea of alibi.

---

---

Issues Involved:
1. Validity of the trial and jurisdiction of the 5th Court.
2. Admissibility of evidence from prosecution witnesses.
3. Conviction of the appellants under Section 149 IPC.

Summary:

1. Validity of the trial and jurisdiction of the 5th Court:
The appellants contended that the trial in the 5th Court was without jurisdiction as the High Court had no power to transfer the case from the 10th Court to the 5th Court by an administrative order after the trial had commenced. The Supreme Court held that the High Court exercised its administrative power u/s 227 of the Constitution of India to transfer the case for administrative exigency and expediency. The transfer was valid as it addressed grievances about overcrowding and inability to accommodate all accused in the courtroom. The Court also clarified that the High Court's administrative powers did not impinge upon the judicial rights of the parties.

2. Admissibility of evidence from prosecution witnesses:
The appellants argued that the evidence of four prosecution witnesses examined in the 10th Court could not be relied upon by the 5th Court. The Supreme Court noted that the 5th Court had framed additional charges and allowed the prosecution to produce witnesses for further cross-examination. The appellants did not avail this opportunity and insisted on fresh examination, which was not allowed by the High Court. The Court held that the evidence recorded in the presence of the accused and extensively cross-examined by their lawyers did not cause any prejudice to the appellants.

3. Conviction of the appellants under Section 149 IPC:
The appellants challenged their convictions under Section 149 IPC, arguing that the prosecution failed to prove specific overt acts by each appellant. The Supreme Court reiterated that under Section 149 IPC, it is not necessary to prove specific overt acts by each member of the unlawful assembly. The Court found that the evidence established that the appellants were part of an unlawful assembly with a common object to commit the offences. The convictions were upheld based on the testimonies of eyewitnesses and the appellants' active participation in the mob.

Conclusion:
The Supreme Court dismissed the appeals, upholding the convictions and sentences of the appellants. The Court found no merit in the contentions regarding the jurisdiction of the 5th Court, the admissibility of evidence, and the application of Section 149 IPC. The plea of alibi raised by the appellants was also found to be unsustainable.

---