Amulya Chandra Paul Vs. the State

Amulya Chandra Paul vs The State

Type Court Judgment Court Guwahati Decided Jul 18, 1963

~2 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/124164

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/124164
Court: Guwahati High Court
Judge: T.N.R. Tirumalpad, J.C.
Decided On: Jul 18, 1963
Subject: ;Criminal

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Key legal issue: ;Criminal

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Amulya Chandra Paul

Respondent

The State

Court's Analysis

Prior History: T.N.R. Tirumalpad, J.C.
1. The petitioner herein is an accused in C. R. Case No. 264 of 1960 before Shri K. P. Dutta, first class Magistrate, Sadar. The case was originally pending before the S.D.M., Sadar and it was transferred to Shri K. P. Dutta on 25-3-63. On 20-4-63 Shri K. P, Dutta examined one P. W. and posted it to 5-6-63 for further hearing. Then the petitioner preferred a revision petition to the Sessions Judge for referring the matter to this Court challenging the competency of Shri

Excerpt

- t.n.r. tirumalpad, j.c.1. the petitioner herein is an accused in c. r. case no. 264 of 1960 before shri k. p. dutta, first class magistrate, sadar. the case was originally pending before the s.d.m., sadar and it was transferred to shri k. p. dutta on 25-3-63. on 20-4-63 shri k. p, dutta examined one p. w. and posted it to 5-6-63 for further hearing. then the petitioner preferred a revision petition to the sessions judge for referring the matter to this court challenging the competency of shri k. p. dutta to try the case. but the sessions judge refused to make a reference and dismissed the revision petition. thereupon the petitioner has filed the present revision petition to set aside the order of the learned sessions judge and to declare that shri k. p. dutta is not competent to try the case.2. the contention of the petitioner is that shri k. p. dutta had ceased to be a magistrate when this case was transferred to him and that therefore he is incompetent to try the case. to deal with this argument, it is necessary to refer to some notifications. shri k. p. dutta was first appointed on 15-1-1954 as a temporary a.s.d.o. sadar by the following notification:shri kali prasanna dutta, b.l., advocate. bar association, agartala, is temporarily appointed as additional sub-divisional officer on a pay of rs. 200/- p.m. in the scale of rs. 200-10-420-15-450/- with dearness allowance, as admissible under the rules for the period upto 28th february, 1954.he is to report for duty at once. he will be dealing with the cases of sadar sub-division.' on the same day there was another notification as follows:in exercise of the powers conferred by sec tion 12 of the code of criminal procedure, 1898

Full Judgment

T.N.R. Tirumalpad, J.C.

1. The petitioner herein is an accused in C. R. Case No. 264 of 1960 before Shri K. P. Dutta, first class Magistrate, Sadar. The case was originally pending before the S.D.M., Sadar and it was transferred to Shri K. P. Dutta on 25-3-63. On 20-4-63 Shri K. P, Dutta examined one P. W. and posted it to 5-6-63 for further hearing. Then the petitioner preferred a revision petition to the Sessions Judge for referring the matter to this Court challenging the competency of Shri K. P. Dutta to try the case. But the Sessions Judge refused to make a reference and dismissed the revision petition. Thereupon the petitioner has filed the present revision petition to set aside the order of the learned Sessions Judge and to declare that Shri K. P. Dutta is not competent to try the case.

2. The contention of the petitioner is that Shri K. P. Dutta had ceased to be a magistrate when this case was transferred to him and that therefore he is incompetent to try the case. To deal with this argument, it is necessary to refer to some notifications. Shri K. P. Dutta was first appointed on 15-1-1954 as a temporary A.S.D.O. Sadar by the following notification:

Shri Kali Prasanna Dutta, B.L., Advocate. Bar Association, Agartala, is temporarily appointed as Additional Sub-Divisional Officer on a pay of Rs. 200/- p.m. in the scale of Rs. 200-10-420-15-450/- with Dearness Allowance, as admissible under the rules for the period upto 28th February, 1954.

He is to report for duty at once. He will be dealing with the cases of Sadar Sub-Division.' On the same day there was another notification as follows:

In exercise of the powers conferred by Sec tion 12 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898

Same Parties Amulya Chandra Paul vs The State Same Subject ;Criminal Same Judge T.N.R. Tirumalpad, J.C.

;Criminal