SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1970 Supreme(Cal) 169

R.N.DUTT, SARMA SARKAR
SHANTI RANJAN BHATTACHARYA – Appellant
Versus
STATE – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
AMAL KUMAR GHOSHAL, CHITTA RANJAN DAS, J.M.BANERJI

R. N. DUTT, J.

( 1 ) THE petitioner is on his trial before a Special Court at Alipore for an alleged offence under Section 409 of the Indian Penal Code.

( 2 ) THE instant case was allotted to the Special Court by a notification of the State Government and the Special Court took cognizance on a petition of complaint filed before it by the Public Prosecutor. The petitioner raised an objection before the Special Court that the Special Court had no jurisdiction to try the instant case. But the Judge presiding over the Special Court has found that he has jurisdiction. The petitioner has thereafter obtained this Rule for quashing the proceeding pending before the Special Court against him.

( 3 ) THE allegations are in short as follows:--The petitioner was the Secretary of Mahasakti Samabaya Samiti, a registered Co-operative Society. While working as such Secretary the petitioner is said to have committed criminal breach of trust in respect of Rs. 14,432. 92p. The Special Court will have jurisdiction to try this case if the petitioner can be said to be a public servant within the meaning of Section 21 of the Indian Penal Code. The learned Judge has found that the petitioner is a Public






Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top