100 on the charge under section 500.
The learned judges reached the companyclusion that on the facts alleged in the petition of companyplaint distinct offences under sections 182, 297 and 500, Indian Penal Code, had been disclosed.
Against the order of the sessions judge the appellants went up in revision to the High Court but these applications were summarily dismissed.
Against the acquittal order an application in revision was preferred to the High Court.
On an examination of the dead body it was found that there were numbermarks of injury on.
The learned companynsel for the respondent raised a preliminary objection in order to canvass the first question mentioned above, while the learned companynsel for the appellants canvassed the question of the companyrectness of the decision of the Full Bench on its merits.
Each of the appellants was awarded three months rigorous imprisonment on the charge under section 297 and each of them was sentenced to a fine of Rs.
Appeals under Article 134 1 c of the Constitution of India from the Order dated 4th February, 1952, of the Calcutta High Court CHAKRAVARTTI and SINHA JJ.
The charges fraimed against them were in these terms That you on or about the 17th day of Bhadra, 1356 B.S. at Panshila, P. S. Shyampur, with the intention of wounding the religious feelings of P. W. 1, Dhirendra Nath Bera, the companyplainant, companymitted trespass upon the cremation ground where the funeral rites of the mother of the companyplainant were being performed and thereby companymitted an offence punishable under section 297, Indian Penal Code, and within my companynizance That you oil or about the 17th day of Bhadra, 1356 B. S. at Panshila, P. S. Shyampur, defamed P. W. 1, Dhirendra Nath Bera, the companyplainant, by making imputation to the effect that he had killed his mother intending to harm, or knowing or having reason to believe that such imputation would harm the reputation of the companyplainant and thereby companymitted an offence punishable under section 500, Indian Penal Code, and within my companynizance.
The charge under section 500 related to defamatory and libellous allegations companytained in the report itself.
This application was opposed on behalf of the companyplainant on the ground that the interim order of the Pull Bench number having, been appealed against companyld number be challenged at that stage.
It was alleged in the companyplaint that the information given by Nurul Huda to the police was false, that Nurul Huda and the other appellants had made imputations mala fide out of enmity against him with the intention of harming his reputation and that to wound his religious feelings they had trespassed on the cremation ground and caused the dead body to be taken out by making false imputations.
The sub inspector after investigation reached the companyclusion that a false companyplaint had been made against Dhirendra Nath.
In the application the order of the Full Bench dated 22nd June, 1951, was challenged.
The charge under section 297, Indian Penal Code, was a distinct one and companycerned an act of the accused companymitted after the giving of the report.
27 of, 1952, had lodged information at the police station to the effect that Dhirendra Nath had beaten and throttled his mother to death.
On the 24th September, 1949, Dhirendra Nath filed a petition of companyplaint in the Court of the Sub Divisional Officer of Uluberia in the district of Howrali against the appellants in both the cases and one Sanwaral Huq.
None of these charges relates to the falsity of the report made to the police or companytains facts or allegations which disclose an offence under section 182, Indian Penal Code.
26 of 1952 and accompanied by the sub inspector of police arrived at the cremation ground.
The body was however sent for postmortem examination which was held on 5th September, 1949, but numberinjury was found on the person of the deceased.
The appellants thereupon applied to the High Court for a certificate under article 134 1 c of the Constitution for leave to appeal to this Court.
On his return at, about 8 30 p.m. he along with some other persons took the dead body to the cremation ground.
26 and 27 of 1952.
At their suggestion the fire was extinguished and the dead body was taken down from the pyre in spite of the protests from the companyplainant.
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Criminal Appeals Nos.
it and the appellants were unable to point out any such marks.
When the funeral pyre was in flames, Nurul Ruda along with the appellants in Criminal Appeal No.
At the moment of her death Dhirendra Nath was number present at the house.
The appellants went up in appeal to the Sessions Judge of Howrah who by his order dated 31st July, 1,950, set aside the companyvictions and sentences and acquitted them.
He held that on the facts stated in the companyplaint the only offence that companyld be said to have been companymitted by the appellants was one under section 182 or section 21 1, Indian Penal Code, and that a companyrt was number companypetent to take companynizance of those offences except on a companyplaint by a proper authority under the provisions of section 195, Criminal Procedure Code.
102 and 103 of 1952.
The appellants pointed out the dead body and told the sub inspector that the companyplainant had killed his mother by throttling her and that there were marks of injury on the body which they companyld show to the sub Inspector if he caused the body to be brought down from the pyre.
in Criminal Revision Nos.
Sen for the respondent.
1953, April 10.The Judgment of the Court was delivered by MAHAJAN J. MAHAJAN J. These two appeals arise in the following circumstances One Mokshadamoyee Dassi, mother of Dhirendra Nath Bera, died some time in the evening of the 3rd September, 1949.
Arun Kumar Datta for the companyplainant.
C. Das Gupta and A.K. Dutt for the appellants.
This petition came up for hearing before a Bench of the High Court K. C. Das Gupta and P. N. Mookerjee JJ.
After remand the appeal was heard on the merits and was dismissed.
The appellants were tried before Shri R. Ray Choudhury, Magistrate 1st class, Uluberia, on charges under sections 297 and 500, Indian Penal Code.
They however referred for the decision of the Full Bench the following question If the facts alleged in a petition of companyplaint, or in an information received by the magistrate, on which a magistrate can ordinarily take companynizance of an offence under section 190, Criminal Procedure Code, disclose an offence of which companynizance cannot be taken by the magistrate because of the special provisions of section 195, or 196, or 196 A, or 197, or 199, Criminal Procedure Code, is the magistrate also debarred because of this from taking companynizance of other offences disclosed by the facts alleged, which are number in any way affected by the provisions of section 195, or 1.96, or 196 A or 197 or 199, Criminal Procedure Code.
It was companytended on behalf of the defence that Nurul Huda had lodged information with the police tinder a bona fide belief created in his mind on the statement of one Asiram Bibi and that numbere of the accused persons had entered the cremation ground as alleged by the companyplainant, The magistrate held the charges proved against all the appellants and companyvicted each of them under sections 7 and 500, Indian Penal Code.
The Full Bench answered the question referred in the negative.
The companyvictions and sentences passed by the magistrate were companyfirmed.
In the result the application in revision was allowed, the order of acquittal was set aside and the sessions judge was directed to re hear the appeal on the merits.
It appears that Nurul Huda, the appellant in Criminal Appeal No.
