I " '" i S 537 is whether the accused person has been preju , Ajodhia Prasad Deokali Prasad diced or not The object of procedure is to enable the (married to Mt Patan (married to Mt Court to do justice but if inspite of even a total dis Dei, Plff) Ram Kali) regard of the rules of procedure, justice has been done, there would exist no necessity for setting aside the final Karangan Lal (dead) Santu Prasad (Deft 1) order which is just and correct simply because the procedure adopted was wrong So in a case of mis Krishna Behan Lal (minor, Deft 2) joinder of persons contrary to S 239 (e), Criminal PC , In 1921 on the death of Mahabir Prasad both Karan though it is an illegality and not a mere irregularity, it is gan Lal and Santu Prasad were minors Mahabir yet curable by S 537, Criminal P C , if it has not in fact Prasad remained in possession of the property till his occasioned injustice I have heard the learned counsel death His two sons, namely Ajodhia Prasad (who was on the question of prejudice and I am satisfied that the the husband of Mt Patan Dei) and Deokali Prasad accused has not in any way been prejudiced in his trial both had predeceased him On his death, therefore, The case is very clear against the accused-applicant his two minor grandsons inherited 7 annas each of the and he has rightly been convicted The learned counsel property covered by the sale The property was then has drawn my attention to the statements of certain mutated to the extent of seven annas each in the witnesses and contended that this evidence should not names of these two boys On 4th July 1921 Mt Patan have been admitted It is not necessary to discuss this Dei applied for being appointed as guardian of her point The evidence of Sri Ram and the Mint Master minor son, Karangan Lal, and in the application she Las, as I have said, been believed and this conclusively showed the seven annas share out of 14 annas purchas proves the case against the applicant There are no ed by Mahabir Prasad as being one of the pro 13

AIR 1927 PC 44

All India Reporter, Privy Council

Privy Council

India

Cases Referring to this Case