CHATURVARTTI, C. J.

( 1 ) THIS is a Rule, calling upon the Chief Presidency Magistrate to show cause why the proceedings pending against the petitioner before a Presidency Magistrate should not be quashed or why such other order or orders should not be made as to this Court may seem fit and proper. The petitioner, Premchand Khetry, is one of three persons who are on trial for certain osences under the Opium Act and who were being tried according to the procedure laid down in Section 251a of the Cri. P. C. His contention is that Section 251a does not apply to the case and that the procedure laid down in Section 252 and subsequent sections of the Code ought to be followed.

( 2 ) THE facts are simple. It is alleged that on receipt of some information, an Inspector of Excise, named Shri B. N. Ray, began to maintain a watch on premises No. 42, Ganesh Chan-dra Avenue, Calcutta, from 24-7-1956 and on that very day noticed a car, bearing the number MBI-1864, coming to the place at about 8-30 P. M. The petitioner was driving the car. On the next day, the same car came to the place twice during the day time and again at about 7-30 P. M. 'when it came in the evening, the petitioner was driv

Click Here to Read the rest of this document