LexAJIT KUMAR P ALIT versus STATE OF WEST BENGAL
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
' ' I S.C.R. SUPREME COURT REPORTS 953 AJIT KUMAR P ALIT v. ST ATE OF WEST BENGAL (H.J. IMAM, N. RAJAGOPALA AYYANGAR and j. R. MUDHOLKAR, jj.) Criminal Trial-Special Court-Cognizance, when taken- Allotment of case to Special Court- If sufficient for taking cognizance-West Bengal Criminal Law Amendment (Special Courts) Act, 1949 (W.B. XX! of 1949) BB. 4, 5- West Bengal Criminal Law Amendment (Special Courts) (Amending) Act, 1960 (W. B. 24 of 1960) s. 2. In 1958 the police filed a report before the Chief Presidency Magistrate charging the appellant and others of offences under ss. 120-B/409 and 477 Indian Penal Code. On June 1,1959, the State Government made an order under s. 4 (2) W. B. Criminal Law Amendment (Special Courts) Act, 1949, assignini( the case to a Special Court. Section 5 (1) of the Act provided that a Special Court may take cognizance nf offences without the accused being committed to it for trial. On a petition made by the Investigating Officer, the Special Court took cognizance of the case and issued process to the accused. The appellant contended that the Special Court could take cognizance only according to the procedure prescribed bys. 190 (1) Code of Criminal Procedure and not merely upon the allot- ment of the case to it or upon the 'complaint' of the Police Officer. Held, that the Special Court could take co.~nizance of the case as soon as it rei:eived orders of allotment of the case and it became vested with jurisdiction to apply its mind and to issue process to the accused as soon it received the records of the case. !he p~ovisions of 190 .(1) of the Code were upon its own terms mapphcable to a Special Court. Tboul(h a Special Court was "de~med" to be a court of session~ s. 5 (I) of the Act specifically provided that. an order of commitment was not necessary fur it to take cognizance and so s. 193 (I) of the Code was not applicable. Bhajahari Monda! v. The State of West Bengal, [1959] S. C.R. 1276, explained. 1962 N1011111"r, 7. 1962 Ajit Kumar Polit v. •tau of West Beng4} A..,Pyangar, J. 954 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1963] SUPP. 1 Section 5( J) as amended by the Amending Act of 1960 provide1 that a Special Court may take cognizance of offences in the manner laid down ins. 190(l}(al and (b} of the Code without an order of commitment. This amendment did not affect the cognizance already taken by the Specia!Judge. The amending Act did not declare what the law was but actually effected a change. CRIMINAL ArPELLATEjURISDICTTON: Criminal Appeal No. 188 of 1961. Appeal by special leave from the judgment and order dated June 8, 1961 of the Calcutta High Court in Criminal Revision No. 1557 of 1959. P. K. Chakra11arti, Amiyalal Chatterjee and P. K. Mukherjee for the Appellant. B. Sen, P. K. Chatterjee and P. K. Bose, for the Respondents. 1962. November 7. The Judgment of the Court was delivered by AYYANGAR, ].-This appeal raises for con- sideration the proper construction of ss. 4 and 5 of the West Bengal Criminal Law Amendment (Special Courts) Act, 19!9 (W. B. XXI of 19!9) to which we shall refer as the Act. The preamble to the Act recites that it was enacted to provide for the speedy trial of the offences specified in the Schedule. Section 2 empowers the State Government to constitute by notification in the Official Gazette one or more special courts. Section 4 enacts, to extract only the portion relevant to this appeal : "S. 4(1} Notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898, or in any 0th.er law, the offences specified in the Schedule shall be triable by Special Courts only . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ' .................................... . (2) ·The distribution amongst Special Courts of cases involving offences specified in the Schedule, • ' I S.C.R. SUPREME COURT REPORTS 955 to be tried by them, shall be made by the State Government." 1962 Jjit Kumar Polit v. This is followed by s. 5 reading, again confining St•t1 of West Bing . oursdves to the portion material for this appeal : "S. 5 (1). A Special Court may take cogni- zance of offences without the accused being committed to his Court for trial, and in trying accused persons, shall follow the procedure, prescribed by the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898, for the trial of warrant cases by Magis- trates, instituted otherwise than on a police report. ........ ' ....................................
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.