N. C. TALUKDAR, J.

( 1 ) THIS is an appeal by the Superintendent and Remembrancer of Legal Affairs West Bengal, on behalf of the State of West Bengal against an order dated the 24th April, 1967 passed by Shri A. K. Roy, Magistrate, first class, Sealdah, in case No C-1848 of 1964 acquitting the accused-respondent under Section 251a (11) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, of charges under Sections 417 and 419 I. P. C.

( 2 ) THE facts leading on to the impugned order can be put in a short compass. In response to an employment notice by the Railway Service Commission, the accused-respondent applied for one of the posts of Inspector of Works and in his application he described his caste as 'dandasi' which is a scheduled caste. He was ultimately appointed in one of the vacancies reserved for the scheduled caste and was posted in the South-East Zone on 22-2-56. It subsequently transpired that the accused-respondent belonged to the 'kapu' (Telaga) community which has not been declared as a scheduled caste by the Government The Delhi Special Police Establishment, Hyderabad Branch accordingly recorded a F. I. R. on 31-12-62 and investigated into the case, ultimately submitting a charge-sheet against the accused-respondent on 28-9-64 in the court of Police Magistrate at Sealdah. The accused-respondent was summoned by the said Magistrate under Section 417 and 419 I. P. C. and thereafter on a consideration of the relevant materials on record the accused was discharged by the said learned Magistrate.

( 3 ) THE State of West Bengal moved against the said order of discharge before the Sessions Judge, 24-Parganas and by an order dated 15-6-66 the Additional Sessions Judge 24-Parganas set aside the said order of discharge and directed a further enquiry. The case on being sent back to the court of the Police Magistrate of Sealdah, he framed charges against the accused-respondent under Sections 417 and 419 I. P. C. by an order dated 30-8-66. At one stage, it was proposed to move the Supreme Court for transfer of the case under Section 561a of the Code of Criminal Procedure from West Bengal to Andhra Pradesh on the ground that the records and the material witnesses are in the State of Andhra Pradesh. But the said application was not ultimately moved. The State of West Bengal subsequently moved the Sessions Judge. 24-Parganas for the transfer of the said case from the court of the Police Magistrate, Sealdah on the ground that the said Magistrate having once discharged the accused on a consideration of the materials before him. the prosecution reasonably apprehended that it would not get a fail trial from him. The Sessions Judge. 24-Parganas by his order dated 24-6-67 rejected the said petition and the matter was sent back to the Police Magistrate's Court at Sealdah. On 20-2-67, the Magistrate issued notices on both the parties for appearance in the court on 15-3-67 and on that date in the presence of the accused-respondent and the Special Public Prosecutor present on behalf of the prosecution, and after having heard both the sides, the case was directed to be put up on 24-4-67, 25-4-67, 26-4-67 27-4-67, 28-4-67 and 29-4-67 at 11-15 a. m.-- "on all dates for P. Ws" and the said witnesses were summoned as per list dated 30-8-66. On 24-4-67, the first date so Fixed, no P. Ws were present and an application for adjournment was filed on behalf of the prosecution statinr that tht Deputv Remembrancer, West Bengal, was instructed to move the High Court under Section 526 of the Code of Criminal Procedure against the order passed by the Sessions Judge. 24-Parganas. The trying Magistrate who, we have been informed, has since been transferred however observed that the prosecution in the facts and circumstances of the case, did not deserve any further adjournment and holding that ''the accused is found not guilty under Sections 417 and 419 I. P C. ," he acauitted the accused-respondent under Section 251a (11) Cr P. C.

( 4 ) MR. Dilip Kumar Dutt, Advocate ap

Click Here to Read the rest of this document