'File 18/10 Trial of Charles E Minnick' [‎137r] (273/280)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, BOMBAY .
Charles Elwood Minnick, Jr., Age 37 years,
Nationality American, at present lodged in
Yeravada Central prison, Poona.
)
) Petitioner.
)
VERSUS
The Supdt., Yeravada Central prison, Poona. )
H.B.M.*s Political Agent A mid-ranking political representative (equivalent to a Consul) from the diplomatic corps of the Government of India or one of its subordinate provincial governments, in charge of a Political Agency. , exercising and )
invested with the powers of District Magis- ) Respondents.
an American citizen has been convicted by the Court of Sessions
at Bahrein Island under Sec.381 I.P.C. and sentenced to undergo
one year’s imprisonment.
power as a court of original jurisdiction to try and convict the
accused unless the same has been cornmiited to it for trial.
3. The Petitioner being an American by birth and nationality
and being an American by citizenship had a right to be tried by
an American jury or a jury approved by him, and had furthermore
a right to be defended by such counsel as he chose. The learned
sessions court had not conceded any of these ordinary and ele
mentary rights.
4. - The learned Sessions judge is wrong in holding that
because the Prosecution also had not the assistance of a lawyer
therefore the defence need not complain about his hardship.
■^he prosecution story is disclosed in .the complaint and needs
no lawyer. It is only the defence that does need any legal
help and particularly in the case of the accused who being a
foreigner must be deemed to be an utter stranger to the techni
calities and abstruse procedure of Indian lav/s.
5. The Petitioner had claimed that he was an American and
had submitted his claim within the meaning of sec.528-A of the
Cr. P.C. but the claim, without any inquiry into its correctness ,
was rejected. The Petitioner submits that this procedure is
arbitrary as it has violated the fundamental rights conceded
by the code to Americans.
6. The disparity between the facts of the case and law
becomes still more grievously apparent on an examination of the
charge against the petitioner. The charge was not proved to
have come within the purview of the Section and the evidence
was woefully lacking in that respect. The confession of the
Petitioner has no significance when thelearned Judge proceeded
to take evidence despite the confession.
7. The Petitioner further submits that he has been committed
by a Warrant which is ab initio invalid and his detention in
custody illegal. The Petitioner has been confined in Jail by a
Warrant not signed by the Court passing the sentence. This the
Petitioner submits violates the provisions of Section 383 of
the Cr. P.C. and creates an incurably illegality which goes to
the bottom of his continuation in prison.
trate and Sessions Judge, Bahrein Island, )
Persian Gulf The historical term used to describe the body of water between the Arabian Peninsula and Iran. . )
Re; Sec.491 Cr. P.C.
THE ABOVE MENTIONED PETITIONER DO HEREBY HUMBLY
PEflTION AS FOLLOWS:
1
The Petitioner, an American by birth, nationality and
2
I'he Petitioner submits that the Court of Sessions has no