DEBABRATA MOOKERJEE, J.

( 1 ) THIS is a reference under Section 269 (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure by a Judge of the City Sessions Court, Calcutta, reporting that the case against the accused pending before that court is such as should be dealt with by the Judge alone and should not be tried with the aid of a jury.

( 2 ) IT appears that one Haridas Mundra and his brother-in-law Remeshwar Daga have been committed to the City Sessions Court to answer charges of conspiracy to cheat, of forgery and cognate offences in respect of a large number of shares of the British India Corporation Ltd. The case is pending trial. The learned Judge reports that in view of the volume and complexity of evidence in the case which he thinks is of a highly technical nature, it is undesirable that the charges should bo tried by a jury. It is also said that a number of witnesses from all over the country will have to be called and about 150 documents will require to be exhibited with the consequence that the trial cannot reasonably be expected to be concluded before three weeks. Accordingly, the learned Judge has reported to this Court for orders that the case be tried by the Judge himself without a jury.

( 3 ) SECTION 269 (4) provides for circumstances in which a trial by jury may be dispensed with. The sub-section is in these words :"when, in respect of a trial in which the accused is charged with an offence triable by jury, it appears to the High Court, on an application made to it or otherwise, that having regard to the volume or complexity of the evidence in the case, the trial is not likely to be concluded within two weeks from its commencement, or that the case would involve consideration of evidence of a highly technical nature, which renders it undesirable that it should be tried by a jury, the High Court may direct that that case shall be tried by the Judge himself without a jury and the Judge shall proceed to try the case accordingly. "

( 4 ) IF the law stood at that, the opinion of the learned Judge would have been of value in deciding as to whether the case should be allowed to be dealt with by the Judge alone; but we think in view of the amended provisions contained in the City Sessions Court Act itself, trial by jury by that court cannot he dispensed with.

( 5 ) IT is to be recalled that Section 269 (4) of the Code which we have just read was introduced into the Code of Criminal Procedure by the Amendment Act 26 of 1955 which came into operation on the 1st of January, 1956. The City Sessions Court Act, 1953, had by its Section 9 provided that all trials before that court shall be by jury. Sub-section 4 of Section 269 of the Code having thereafter been introduced by the Amendment Act XXVI of 1955, Section 9 of the City Sessions Court Act could not escape the consequence and was affected or at least a doubt was caused as to the true legislative intent. Hence arose the necessity of amendment to keep alive the provision of trial by jury in all cases before the City Sessions Court. Accordingly the City Sessions Court Act has since been amended and the amendment of the Act has been carried out by the West Bengal Criminal Law Amendment Act (Act XXVI) of 1956 which came into operation on the 24th August, 1956. Section 3 of the last named Act is in these words :"notwithstanding anything contained in Sections 268 and 269 of the Code all trials before the City Sessions Court shall be by jury and such Court, if it is satisfied that the interests of justice so require, may, on application made to it or of its own motion, by order direct that any trial before it shall be by jurors summoned from a special jury list and may revoke or alter such order. "

( 6 ) IT is thus plain that Section 269 (4) of the Code, of Criminal Procedure has no application to a trial before the City Sessions Court by virtue of the amendment introduced by the West Bengal Criminal Law Amendment Act 1956. Indeed, the position was conceded on behalf of the State.

( 7

Click Here to Read the rest of this document