AFTAB AHMAD KHAN versus THE STATE OF HYDERABAD

Citation: [1955] 1 S.C.R. 588 · Decided: 06-05-1954 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: BIJAN KUMAR MUKHERJEA

Judgment (excerpt)

1954 
The State of 
Bombay 
v. 
Bombay Education 
Soriety and 
Others. 
Das]. 
1954 
May6 
• 
588 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[1955 J 
equitable distribution of the total grant among Anglo-
Indian Schools, although the impugned order was not 
intended to affect the total grant available for distri-
bution to Anglo-Indian Schools under the Constitution. 
If, 
in the light oi the covering circular. clause 7 is to 
be 
tre:1ted · as 
operative, in 
the 
se11se 
that a non-
comp11ance with it will entail loss of the whole or part 
of this grant as. a result of the change in the 
existing 
procedure for 
the 
equitable 
distribution, 
then it 
undoubtedly adds to article 337 of the Constitution a 
further conJition for the receipt by Anglo-Indian Schools 
of the special grant secured to them by that article. On 
the other hand if clause 7 is to be 
treated merely as 
ad.vice, which 
may or may not be accepted or acted 
upon, then clause 5 will amount to an absolute prohibi-
tion against the admission of pupils who are not Anglo-
Indians or citizens of non-Asiatic descent into Anglo-
India11 Schools and will compel the authorities of such 
Schools 
to commit a breach 
of their 
Constitutional 
obligation under article 337 and thereby forfeit their 
constitutional 
right to 
the 
special grants. In either 
view of the matter the impugned order cannot but be 
regarded as unconstitutional. In our opinion the second 
question raised in these appeals must also, 
in view of 
article 337, be answered agaimt the State. 
The result of the foregoing discussion is that these 
appeals must be dismissed and we order accordingly. 
The State must pay the costs of the respondents. 
Appeals dismissed. 
AFT AB AHMAD KHAN 
"· 
THE STATE OF HYDERABAD. 
[MmrnERJEA, VIVIAN BosE and GHULAM HASAN JJ.] 
Criminal Procedure Code (Act V of 1898), ss. 233, 235-Scope 
of s. 233-Law as to joinder of charges-except;on 
thereto 
enacted 
jn s. 235-/oint trial of distinct oflc'nceJ. 
Section 233 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (Act V of 1398) 
embodies the general 
law as 
to 
the 
joinder of charges and lays 
down a rule that 
for every 
distinct 
offence 
there 
should 
Ge a 
) 
-.. 
--
. ' 
-
•
( 
-
J 
• 
,) 
S.C.R. 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
589 
separate charge and every such charge should be tried separately. 
No doubt the object 
of 
section 
233 is to save the accused from 
being embarrassed in his defence if distinct 
offences are lumped 
together in one charge or in separate charges and are tried together 
but the Legislature has engrafted certain exceptions 
upon this rule 
contained in sections 234, 235, 236 and 239. 
Section 235 of the Code of Criminal 
Procedure provides that 
if in one series of acts so connected together as to form the same 
transaction, more offences than one are committed by the 
same 
person, he 
may be charged with, and tried at one trial for e\'ery 
such ofience. 
The 
prosecution story 
showed 
that 
the offence of extortion 
committed on a particular day was one of a series of acts connected 
with the offence of murder and attempt to murder committed on 
the previous day in such a way as to form one transaction. 
The incidents related in the evidence left no doubt that from 
Y 
• the moment the accused (a Reserve Inspector of 
Police) 
started 
from the Police State, he committed a series of acts involving kill-
ing, 
injuring people, unlawfully 
confining others 
and extorting 
money from one of them and therefore the series of acts attributed 
to him constituted one 
transaction 
in the 
course of which two 
offences which were alleged to be distinct were committed. 
Held, that 
under 
the 
circumstances the case fell within the 
H cld, that under 
the circumstances the case fell within the 
purview of section 235 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and 
such joinder was permitted by the exception enacted in 
that 
Where the two Judges of the High Court on appeal are divided 
in their opinion as to the guilt of the accused and the third Judge 
to whom reference is made agrees with one of them who is uphold-
ing the conviction and sentence, it is desirable as a matter 
of 
convention though not as a matter of strict law that ordinarily 
the extreme penalty should not be imposed. 
CRIMINAL 
APPELLATE 
JURISDICTION : 
Criminal 
Appeal No. 82 of 1953. 
Appeal under article 134( 1) ( c) of the Constitution 
of India from the Judgment and Order dated the 16th 
August, 1953, of the High Court of Judicature at 
Hyderabad in Crimi

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.