On August 1, 1967 a Division Bench of the Calcutta High Court issued suo moto a Rule Criminal Revision No.
The Match had to be abandoned for the day.
in respect of the incident which took place, on the second day January 1, 1967 of the Second Cricket Test Match between India and West Indies at the Eden Gardens.
selling tickets announcing that arrangements had been made for the accommodation of about 60,000 spectators, while as a matter of fact nearly a lakh of spectators were admitted into the enclosure.
On March 2, 1967 the companyplainant filed an application before the Chief Presidency Magistrate for leave to withdraw the companyplaint against eight accused, namely, accused Nos.
On March 20, 1967 the Chief Presidency Magistrate discharged under s. 253 2 Cr.
The Test match was to be played under the companytrol, management and supervision of the Cricket Association of Bengal, which had sold tickets of various denominations for the game.
He had further mentioned that an Inquiry Commission called the Sen Commission was already inquiring into the events companynected with the incident that took place on January 2, 1967 in order to find out the persons responsible for the same.
Those persons were the President, the Vice President and other office bearers and Members of the Working Committee of the Cricket Association of Bengal.
16, 17, 18, 19, 23, 27, 30 land 34, under s. 204 3 Cr.
The reason given by the companyplainant was that the said accused persons had ceased to act as members of the Working Committee at the material time.
The game started as scheduled on December 31, 1966.The play was interrupted by a number of spectators scaling over the fencing erected around the play ground and entering the cricket field.
But the Chief Presidency Magistrate has further stated that numberuseful.
P.C. on the ground that the companyplainant had number deposited the necessary charges for issue of summons.
The companyplainant bad also made a prayer for issue of search warrants and for seizure of the account books and other relevant papers in the custody of the first accused appellant and search warrants were issued on January 6, 1967.
The arrangements for going out of the enclosures were also grossly inadequate with the result that some of the spectators who wanted to clear out quickly in panic sustained injuries.
Notwithstanding, this the people with tickets were being pushed into different en closures with the result that the spectators within the enclosures started jumping over the fence and occupied the space between the lines of the field and the fencing.
Appeal by special leave from the judgment and order dated January 14, 17, 1968 of the Calcutta High Court in Criminal Revision No.
For these reasons the Chief Presidency Magistrate passed an order discharging all the other remaining accused under s. 253 2 Cr.
It was further alleged that as, a matter of fact the rash and negligent act of the first appellant also resulted in hurt being caused to a number of persons, who, bad companye to witness the Match.
On January 3, 1967 the Chief Presidency Magistrate examined the companyplainant and heard his companynsel.
There were tickets sold for all.
The accused so discharged were Nos.
8, 10, 11, 22, 26, 31, 32 and 33.
45 went to attend the game and found all the stands jampacked.
This infuriated the crowd, which retaliated by acts of arson.
P.C. the eight accused as prayed for by the, companyplainant in his application dated March 2, 1967, after accepting the reasons given therein.
On June 8, 1967, the Chief Presidency Magistrate dismissed the companyplaint as against accused Nos.
On seeing the said news item, the High Court by its order dated June 13, 1967 called for the record pertaining to the case from the companyrt of the Chief Presidency Magistrate, Calcutta.
On the day in question, the companyplainant, who was a holder of a season ticket for Rs.
It was numbered by the Chief Presidency Magistrate that the companyplainant though called was absent.
The police, unable to companytrol the rush and companyfusion caused by the behaviour of the crowd,suddenly started a lathi charge followed by the bursting of tear gas shells, which resulted in causing injuries to various persons.
Under these circumstances, the companyplainant stated that he does number intend to companytinue the companyplaint instituted by him.
On these facts the companyplainant alleged that the first appellant who acted most rashly and negligently in overselling the tickets and admitting a large number of people than companyld be companyveniently accommodated inside the ground and thereby endangered human lives and the personal safety of thousands of spectators.
19 of 1967 by the High Court on February 24, 1967 and in companysequence of the stay of proceedings being vacated, the Chief Presidency Magistrate proceeded to deal further with the companyplaint.
The news regarding the termination of these proceedings appeared in some of the Dailies in Calcutta on June 10, 1967.
purpose will be served by proceeding further with the companyplaint as the companyplainant was number present and was also number serious to proceed with the companyplaint as is evident from his companyduct in companyitting several defaults.
However, numberhing untoward happened on that day.
Some of the office bearers of the first appellant on receipt of summons challenged before the High Court in Criminal Revision No.
8, 10, 11, 22, 26, 31, 32 and 33.
475 of 1967.
days of the Match andthere were arrangements made for the sale of daily tickets.
Dealing with the application dated May 31, 1967 filed by the companyplainant for permission to withdraw the companyplaint, the Chief Presidency Magistrate has stated that he cannot accord permission to withdraw the companyplaint as the proceedings under s. 338 I.P.C. are warrant procedure proceedings.
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Criminal Appeal No.
1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10, 12, 13, 14, 15 and 26.
The sitting arrangement was most inconvenient and,, highly unsatisfactory.
On May 31, 1967, the companyplainant filed another application before the Chief Presidency Magistrate seeking permission to withdraw the companyplaint against the rest of the accused.
270 of 1968.
The respondent did number appear.
K. Daphtary, Nalin Chandra Banerjee, D. N. Mukherjee and Mukul Gopal Mukherjee, for the appellants.
Apart from the Cricket Association of Bengal, which was the first accused, he made 33 persons accused in his companyplaint petition.
According to the prosecution, the first appellant started.
The arrangements made by the first appellant for accommodating the persons inside the enclosure were so grossly inadequate that it tended to endanger the personal safety of the spectators.
475 of 1967 reversing the orders passed by the Court of the Chief Presidency Magistrate, Calcutta, discharging the accused appellants.
The circumstances leading up to the order of the High Court may be indicated The second respondent filed a, companyplaint on January 3, 1967 before the Court of the Chief Presidency Magistrate, Calcutta,.
The learned Judges after hearing all the parties, by the impugned judgment set aside the two orders of the Chief Presidency Magistrate discharging the accused.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by Vaidialingam, J This appeal, by special leave is, directed against the judgment and order dated 14/17 June, 1968 of the Calcutta High Court in Criminal Revision No.
But the learned Judges directed that the proceedings need be companytinued only against the 14 accused, namely, Nos.
P.C. Therefore, it will be seen that by the two orders dated March 20, and June 8, 1967, referred to above, the Chief Presidency Magistrate discharged all the accused and terminated the proceedings initiated by the second respondent.
In that application he stated that he had filed the companyplaint to voice the grievances of the bona fide spectators, who had purchased tickets for witnessing the Cricket Test Match.
