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

1954 Supreme(Cal) 36

CHUNDER
SK. MUKTEAR – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF WEST BENGAL – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
AJIT KUMAR DUTT, Amaresh Chandra Roy, N.K.Sen

CHUNDER, J.

( 1 ) THIS Rule was Issued at the instance of six persons who were arrested by the police along with another person when they were paid to have been driving bullock carts containing paddy across the border of West Bengal and Bihar. The Police arrested them and started seven cases under Section 7 (2) (8) of Act 24 of 1946. During the police investigation, an order having been obtained from a Magistrate, the custody of the cart and the bullocks were obtained by the six petitioners, We are not concerned with the case the seventh person. He was sent up by the police, and after evidence had been taken, he pleaded guilty and was sentenced.

( 2 ) THE case against the six petitioners before me was not proceeded against by the police who submitted final report on the grounds that their identity as the actual offenders had not been established. What is said to have happened is that after the police seized the property the miscreants had run away. The evidence that they were actually in the carts was considered insufficient, and so no report for taking action against them was made by the police to the Magistrate, i. e. , no charge sheet was submitted. After their discharge from




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