PRIVY COUNCIL

                    Taba Singh

                    Vs.

                    Emperor

                    Petitions for Special Leave to Appeal, 1924
                (Lords Buckmaster and Dunedin and Atkinson JJ.)

                    06.02.1924

                    JUDGMENT

LORD BUCKMASTER J.

1. Their Lordships are quite unable to grant the leave asked for in this case.

2. Counsel who has appeared before their Lordships has done his clear duty of placing
before this Board such facts as appear to him relevant to obtain the success of this
appeal. But their Lordships must ex press their regret that the pains that they have
taken to make clear the rules upon which this Board will proceed in considering
questions relating to Criminal appeals should have been so widely misunderstood or
so wholly ignored as to have permitted the presentation of the petition in the case. The
responsibility for the administration of criminal justice in India this Board will neither
accept nor share, unless there has been some violation of the principles of justice or
some disregard of legal principles; this Board will not consider appeals brought from
the Criminal jurisdiction in the Province of India.

3. They cannot but regret those who are connected with the legal profession in India
should have so completely disregarded those injunctions that their Lord ships have so
often laid down. It is a grievous thing to think of the distress and the anxiety which
must be caused to the relations and friends of the condemned men by holding out to
them vain and illusive hopes that the penality which has been inflicted can be
mitigated or reversed by this Board, except in the special circumstances to which I
have referred.

Leave refused.