CALCUTTA HIGH COURT
Richardson, J., Mookerjee, J.
Amrita Lal Hazra & Ors. - Appellant
Versus
Emperor - Respondent
Decided On : 02-02-1915
JUDGMENT
Mookerjee and Richardson, JJ. - Oil the 21st of November 1913, during the curly hours of the morning, in execution of a warrant issued by the Deputy Commissioner of Sylhet, a search was made of a room rented and occupied by one Sasankasekhar Hazra, alias Amrital Hazra, at 296-1, Upper Circular Road, in the eastern suburbs of Calcutta. The search warrant authorised the Commissioner of Police to search the premises for explosives, letters and documents in connection with a bomb outrage committed at Moulvi Bazar, on the 27th March 1913. At the search, the police arrested Sasaukasekliar Hazra, as also three other persons, Dinesh Chandra Das Gupta, Chandra Sekhar De, and Saroda Charan Guha, who were found asleep inside the room. The police found in the room various articles a ad papers, and amongst others a tobacco tin fitted with three iron discs (two inside and one outside) and four iron clamps, another tin of similar size, four clamps made to fit the second tin, and other discs and clamps, finished and unfinished. According to the prosecution, these articles were made for use as the envelope or shell of a lethal bomb. On the 23rd November, J. N. Ghosh, the Police Officer to whom the warrant had been endorsed for execution, gave the first information, in which it was alleged that the four persons arrested had committed offences under Sections 4 and 5 of the Explosive Substances Act, 1908. On the 26th November, the District Magistrate transferred the case for disposal to Mr. Veitch. On the 6th December, one Kalipada Ghosh alias Upendralal Rai Choudhury, was arrested in College Street with ten copies of a seditious leaflet, willed Liberty Leaflet, of which two were on pink paper and the other eight on white paper. On the 26tli January, 1914, one Khagendra Nath Choudhury alias Surest) Chandra Choudhury, was arrested in a house at Baranagore, in the northern suburbs of Calcutta. Meanwhile, search warrants had been executed in various places and information gathered as to the antecedents of the persons in custody. The original proceedings, commenced on the 23rd November, were then withdrawn by the Public Prosecutor u/s 494, Criminal Procedure Code, and the four persons arrested on the 2lst November, were discharged on the 19th January, 1914. At the same time, a fresh complaint was made in which Sasanka, Dinesh, Saroda, Chandra Sekhar, Kalipada and, Khogen, along with one Hiranmoy Banerjee, who had been in the interval arrested at Benares were charged under Sections 4, 5 and 6 of the Explosive Substances Act as also u/s 120-B of the Indian Penal Code. The consent of the Local Government required by Section 7 of the Explosive Substances Act, 1908, was also duly obtained. The Magistrate held that the case against Hiranmoy Banerjee had not been established and discharged him. The other six accused were committed to lake their trial in the Court of Session. The first charge against them was to the effect that Sasanka, Dinesh, Saroda and Chandra Sekhar, on or about the 21stNovember, 1913, at 296-1, Upper Circular Road, had in their possession or under their control explosive substances, to wit, Exhibits I, v. VI, VII and other exhibits, all materials for the creation of bombs, with intent by means thereof to endanger life and had thereby committed an offence punishable u/s 4 (b) of the Explosive Substances Act, 1908. The second charge was to the effect that Sasanka, Dinesh, Saroda, Chandra Sekhar, Kalipada and Khagendra, between March, 1911, and 21st November, 1913, at 296-1, Upper Circular Road, and other places in British India had conspired, with 'one another and other persons, to wit, Biroja, Satish Chandra Chakravarty, Bhupendra Nath Sen, Profulla Ranjan Gupta, Jogesh Chandra Roy, Nirmal Kanta Roy and other persons to make and keep explosive substances with intent by means thereof to endanger life or enable other persons to endanger life, an offence punishable u/s 4 (b) of the Explosive Substances Act, 1908, and had thereby com
The conviction upheld under the Official Secrets Act, determining that discovery of significant offending material justifies charges of anti-national activities, with the reliability of police testim....
Evidence must establish all circumstances consistent with the accused's guilt, with no reasonable hypothesis of innocence possible, especially in cases of circumstantial evidence.
In view of Section 10 of the Evidence Act anything said, done or written by those who enlist their support to the object of conspiracy and those who join later or make their exit before completion of....
The judgment establishes the discretionary nature of the power under Section 319 Cr.P.C. and emphasizes the need for strong and cogent evidence before summoning a person as an additional accused.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.