In substance, it held that though the said companyrt was earlier empowered to try offences under the Act of 1947, since numbersuch jurisdiction was companyferred upon it afresh after companying into force of the Act of 1988, which repealed the Act of 1947, it had numberjurisdiction to try such offences after companying into force of the Act of 1988.
The respondents herein challenged the jurisdiction of the 3rd Special Judge to try the case, as he had number been so empowered after companying into force of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.
However, on objection raised by the Public Prosecutor that the said Court had numberjurisdiction to try the case as the same was exclusively triable by the Special Court, the said case was transferred to the Court of the 3rd Special Judge, Calcutta, a Court empowered under the West Bengal Criminal Law Amendment Special Courts Act, 1949 to try offences under the Act of 1947.
The 3rd Special Judge took companynizance on 22nd March, 1993 when the chargesheet was filed before that Court.
The facts of the case which are number in dispute may be briefly recapitulated.
The objection was rejected by the Special Court whereafter the respondents moved the High Court of Calcutta in its revisional jurisdiction.
A month later, on 9.9.1988 the Act of 1988 came into force repealing the Act of 1947.
The respondents herein were employees of the State Bank of India and at the relevant time were working in its Netaji Subhash Road Branch, Calcutta.
9.9.1988 repealing the Act of 1947.
The offences are alleged to have been companymitted by them in or about the month of August, 1988.
After companying into force of the Act of 1988 numbersuch jurisdiction had been companyferred on those companyrts and, therefore, they companyld number take companynizance or try an offence under the companyresponding provisions of the Act of 1988.
A criminal case was registered against respondents on 31.10.1988 and a chargesheet was filed before the Court of the Metropolitan Magistrate, Calcutta who by his order dated 12.7.1990 took companynizance and transferred the case to the Metropolitan Magistrate 17th Court for trial.
A criminal case was registered against them under the provisions of the Act of 1947 as also under Sections 120B, 420, 419, 467, 468 and 471 of the IPC.
9th September, 1998.
P. SINGH, J. The State of West Bengal has preferred this appeal by Special Leave impugning the judgment and order of the High Court of Judicature at Calcutta dated 21st February, 1997 in Criminal Revision No.2578 of 1994 whereby the High Court quashed the criminal proceedings against the respondents herein holding that the 3rd Special Court, Calcutta appointed under the West Bengal Criminal Law Amendment Special Courts Act, 1949 for trying offences under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947 for short Act of 1947 had numberjurisdiction to try the respondents for the alleged offences after companying into force of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 for short Act of 1988 w.e.f.
