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

1985 Supreme(Cal) 207

BIMAL CHANDRA BASAK
CHANDANMAL CHOPRA – Appellant
Versus
STATE – Respondent


BIMAL CHANDRA BASAK, J.


( 1 ) I have heard and disposed of this application on the 13th of May 1985 when I indicated that I shall give my reasons later. Facts:

( 2 ) THIS is an application under Art. 226 of the Constitution of India praying for a Writ of Mandamus directing the State of West Bengal to declare each copy of the Koran, whether in the original Arabic or in its translation in any of the languages, as forfeited to the Government.

( 3 ) THIS application was first moved before Khastgir, J. The learned Judge entertained the application, gave directions for notice and for affidavits. Thereafter for some reason or other the learned Judge chose not to proceed in this matter any further and released this matter from her list. Such reason cannot be found out from the records of this case though the learned Judge had chosen to take an unprecedented step by giving an interview to the Press regarding the same of which I cannot and do not take any notice. The Chief Justice thereafter assigned this matter to me. As the learned Judge after giving directions has chosen not to hear this matter any further and as this matter has been assigned to me. I have recalled all the earlier orders







































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