170 and 171 of 1977 From the Judgment and Order dated 29th May, 1975 of the Calcutta High Court in Criminal Appeal No.
Special Court, Calcutta hereinafter referred to as the learned Trial Judge for the sake of brevity were Army Officers.
P.C. The following companytentions were urged before the High Court on behalf of the State with a view to substantiate the companytention that the learned Trial Judge had jurisdiction to take companynizance of the case and that the trial was number null and void numberwithstanding the fact that the procedure prescribed by the Rules had number been followed.
The rules framed under Section 549 1 of Cr.
P.C. were number attracted inasmuch as the rules applied to Magistrates and number to a Judge presiding over a Special Court.
The question which calls for determination in these two allied appeals by special leave preferred by the State of West Bengal is whether the High Court was right in doing so.
5 of 1973.
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Criminal Appeal Nos.
The following facts are number in dispute Three accused persons who were tried by the Judge presiding over the Fourth Addl.
The High Court has taken the view that the learned Judge presiding over the Special Court had acted without jurisdiction in taking companynizance of the case and proceeding with the trial of three Army Officers resulting in the companyviction of one of them, and the acquittal of the remaining two and has quashed the proceedings.
Appeal No.
308 of 1972 and Govt.
Rathin Dass and Pankaj Kalra for the Respondents.
P. Mukherjee and G.S. Chatterjee for the Appellant.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by THAKKAR, J. The validity of the trial of three Army Officers is in question.
