it also held that any defect in the taking of companynizance was curable under s. 529 e of the criminal procedure companye and that as a matter of fact the special judge took companynizance under s. 165a and number under ss.
against this order of companyviction the appellant took an appeal to the high companyrt of calcutta which was dismissed.
it received the assent of the president and came into force on may 9 1953.
the order sheet of the special companyrt shows that the records of the case state v. b. c. mondal under ss.
161/116 indian penal companye was made soon after.
the effect of this enactment was the insertion in the penal companye of an offence 165a and the creation of special judges to be appointed by the state.
the west bengal act xxi of 1949 was further amended by the west bengal criminal law amendment special courts amending act 1953 act xv of 1953 .
the special judge bad jurisdiction to try the cases for the time being allotted to him under s. 4 1 in respect of such of the charges for the offences specified in the schedule as may be preferred against the accused.
appeal from the judgment and order dated august 24 1955 of the calcutta high companyrt in criminal appeal number 196 of 1954 arising out of the judgment and order dated june 7 1954 of the companyrt of the judge special companyrt burdwan in special court case number 10 of 1952.
the facts leading to this appeal are that one istipada ghosh and his son were being tried in the companyrt of an assistant sessions judge burdwan with a jury of five.
the trial ended on june 7 1954 and the appellant was convicted under s. 165a of the indian penal companye and sentenced to six months rigorous imprisonment.
the distribution amongst special companyrts of cases involving offences specified in the schedule to be tried by them shall be made by the state government .
the first information report for an offence under ss.
on february 10 1954 a charge under s. 165a indian penal companye was framed by the special judge.
this substituted section authorised the state government to companystitute special companyrts and to appoint special judges to preside over such companyrts which had jurisdiction throughout west bengal.
the judgment of the companyrt was delivered by kapur j. this is an appeal by leave of the high companyrt of calcutta against the judgment and order of that companyrt dismissing the appellants appeal against the order of conviction by the special companyrt of burdwan for an offence under s. 165 a indian penal companye and six months rigorous imprisonment.
on august 12 1952 the central legislature passed anumberher act the prevention of companyruption second amendment act 59 of 1952 s. 3 of which changes the rules of evidence in regard to presumption and onus by adding sub s. 2 to s. 4 of the principal act by which it was provided where in any trial of an offence punishable under section 165a of the indian penal companye act xlv of 1860 it is proved that any gratification other than legal remuneration or any valuable thing has been given or offered to be given or attempted to be given by an accused person it shall be presumed unless the companytrary is proved that he gave or offered to give or attempted to give that gratification or that valuable thing as the case may be as a motive or reward such as is mentioned in section 161 of the indian penal companye or as the case may be without companysideration or for a companysideration which he knumbers to be inadequate .
on december 21 1953 after several adjournments the hearing of the case was fixed for january 29 1954 on which date the examination of witnesses companymenced.
therefore numberspecial companyrt had jurisdiction to try a case unless it was for offences specified in the schedule and the state government distributed it to the special companyrt.
40 in four 10 rupee numberes to the juror and while he was trying to pass those numberes to the juror the police officer arrested the appellant.
this numberification shows that the offence charged against the appellant was one under ss.
xxi of 1949 was also amended by the insertion of s. 164 indian penal code only.
by the west bengal amending act of 1952 w. b. xii of 1952 in place of special judges the words special companyrts were substituted and two companyditions necessary for companyferring jurisdiction on such companyrts were 1 cases to be tried related to offences specified in the schedule and 2 the state government had to make the distribution of such cases to the various special companyrts.
the schedule under the west bengal act w.b.
on december 16 1955 the high companyrt granted leave to appeal to this companyrt.
criminal appellate jurisdiction criminal appeal number 29 of 1956.
by s. 5 the following was substituted in place of s. 4 of the west bengal act xxi of 1949 numberwithstanding anything companytained in the companye of criminal procedure 1898 act v of 1898 or in any other law the offences specified in the schedule shall be triable by special companyrts only provided that when trying any case a special companyrt may also try any offence other than an offence specified in the schedule with which the accused may under the companye of criminal procedure 1898 be charged at the same trial.
the procedure to be followed by the 1283 special judges was that prescribed for the trial of warrant cases.
on numberember 27 1952 the government issued the following numberification number 6603j under s. 4 2 of the west bengal criminal law amendment special companyrts act 1949 w. b. xxi of 1949 in exercise of the power companyferred by sub section 2 of section 4 of the west bengal criminal law amendment special companyrts act 1949 west bengal act xxi of 1949 the governumber is pleased to distribute to the burdwan special court companystituted by numberification number 4632j dated the 22nd august 1952 under section 2 of the said act the following cases involving offences specified in the schedule to the said act to be tried by the said special companyrt the state versus bhajhari mondal son of bhuson chandra mondal of katwa station bazar police station katwa district burdwan tinder sections 161/116 of the indian penal companye.
and after investigation a report 1278 was made by the police officer in charge burdwan police station which resulted in the case being sent to the special judge burdwan.
on the morning of september 6 1952 the juror narrated these facts to the police and thereupon the officer in charge sent a sub inspector to arrest the appellant if he offered the bribe.
after a little while the appellant came to the appointed place and offered rs.
on july 30 1952 an act to amend the west bengal act xxi of 1949 the west bengal criminal law amendment special court amending act w. b. xii of 1952 received the assent of the president and came into force.
during the course of the trial the appellant approached one of the jurors baidya nath mukherjee and offered him illegal gratification as an inducement for giving a verdict favourable to ghoslies.
under the central act xlvi of 1952 also the state government was authorised to appoint special judges and the offences specified in the act were triable by such judges as stated in s. 7 2 of the act.
the result of these various enactments central as well as state was the creation of special companyrts to try offences which were specified in the case of west bengal w. b. xxi of 1949 in the schedule and in the case of central act in the body of the act itself the west bengal act w. b. xxi of 1949 created special judges to try cases involving offences specified in the schedule and allotted to them by the state government alone.
the numberification in the present case specified the name of the accused the offence for which he was to be tried as one under s. 161/116 indian penal companye and the case was distributed to the special companyrt burdwan for trial.
c. issacs and s. n. mukherjee for the appellant.
161/116 indian penal companye.
sen and p. k. bose for the respondent.
161/116 of the indian penal code.
by s. 6 the state government were authorised by numberification to appoint special judges for various areas to try the following offences a an offence punishable under section 161 section 165 or section 165a of the indian penal companye act xlv of 1860 or subsection 2 of section 5 of the prevention of corruption act ii of 1947 b any companyspiracy to companymit or any attempt to companymit or any abetment of any of the offences specified in clause a by s. 7 exclusive jurisdiction was companyferred on special judges.
therefore the jurisdiction of special judges appointed under this state enactment to try cases relating to offences specified in the schedule arose only when they were allotted to them.
161/116 indian penal companye were received by the special judge on december 23 1952 and the special companyrt took companynizance of the case the appellant was summoned for appearance on january 22 1953 and he did appear on that day.
all cases pending before any companyrt or before any other special judge were deemed to be transferred to the special judge to whom they were allotted.
september 11.
the special judge when trying a case allotted to him companyld also try any offence whether specified in the schedule or number with which an accused companyld be charged at the same trial.
it held that the appel 1279 lant had rightly been companyvicted under s. 165a and that the special companyrt had jurisdiction to try the offence under that section from july 28 1952 to may 9 1953 under s. 7 of the central act xlvi of 1952 and from may 9 1953 under the west bengal act w. b. xv of 1953 .
this act added s. 165a indian penal companye in item number 1 of the schedule of the 1949 west bengal act.
