9911796707
TMI Blog1959 (3) TMI 78X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rsons were committed to the Court of Sessions, 24 Parganas, by the Police Magistrate, Sealdah, to take their trial on charges under Sections 489-A, 489-B, 489-C and 489-D read with Section 120-B of the Indian Penal Code. Against Jiban there was a charge for a specific offence under Section 489D of the Indian Penal Code alleged to have been committed in pursuance of the conspiracy. There were, it may be mentioned, similar charges for specific offences, said to have been committed in pursuance of the conspiracy, against some of the other persons. Before trial commenced in the Sessions Court, an application was made by Jiban praying that the specific charge of Section 489D of the Indian Penal Code should be excluded from the trial on the ground that the Police Magistrate had no jurisdiction to hold the enquiry under Chapter XVIII into this offence and the Sessions Judge had no jurisdiction to try this offence of Section 489D, inasmuch as the offence was alleged to have been committed at Murigram, Howrah, which was admittedly beyond the territorial jurisdiction of the Magistrate's Court as well as of the Sessions Court. 2. It appears that Ramani Mohan Das, who was one of the 24 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ter to the Full Bench. The questions referred are in these words: (1) Whether Section 235 (1) and Section 239(d) Cr. P. C., are to be read partly as exceptions to the general rule laid down in Section 177, Cr. P.C., so as to permit the trial of specific offences alleged to have been committed by one Or more of the accused who are all charged with having conspired to commit such offences by a Judge who legally takes cognizance of the offence of conspiracy when the specific acts are alleged to have been committed outside the local limits of the jurisdiction of that Judge. (2) Whether Bisseswar's case AIR1924Cal1034 was rightly decided by this Court. ' 6. It is obvious that the real question is whether provisions of Sections 235 (1) and 239 (d) of Criminal Procedure Code confer on a Court which has jurisdiction to try an offence of conspiracy, jurisdiction to try offences committed, in pursuance of the conspiracy even though committed outside the local limits of the Court's jurisdiction. Chapter XV of the Criminal Procedure deals with the question of jurisdiction of Criminal Courts in enquiries and trials. The general provision as regards jurisdiction is containe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rts not subordinate to this High Court have taken cognizance of the same offence. Section 188 provides that when an offence is committed by any citizen of India at any place without and beyond India or any person committed any offence in a ship or aircraft registered in India, wherever it may be he may be dealt with in respect of such offence as if it had been committed at any place within India at which he may be found. 7. None of the Sections contain any provision to the effect that all offences committed in pursuance of a conspiracy may be tried by a Court which has jurisdiction to try the offence of conspiracy. Nor does any of these Sections contain a provision that all offences committed in the course of the same transaction may be tried by a Court having jurisdiction to try any of them. 8. The position, therefore is that while it is undoubtedly correct that there are many exceptions to the general rule laid down in Section 177 that an offence has to be inquired into or tried by a Court within the local limits of whose jurisdiction it has been committed, there is no exception contained in any of the provisions in Chapter XV either generally as regards offences committed ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o justification therefore, for reading may be in these Sections as shall be . There is thus no basis for holding that the legislature necessarily intended that a Court having jurisdiction to try one of the offences shall have jurisdiction to try all the other offences triable at the same trial. There will be many cases where these enabling provisions for joint trial will be effective, namely in all cases where the same Court has jurisdiction linger other provisions of the law to try all the offences proposed to be tried at the same trial. It is not as it the intention of the legislature as embodied in the Section becomes frustrated unless a Court having jurisdiction to try one of the offences id assumed to have jurisdiction to try all of them. 12. It is proper to remember in this connection that Sections 235 and 239 are exceptions to the general rule laid down in Section 233 that every offence shall be tried separately. The legislature, when laying down the general rule in Section 233 added the words except in the cases mentioned in Sections 234, 235, 236 and 239. The express object of the legislature in enacting Sections 235 and 239 was therefore to provide exceptions t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n the jurisdiction of the Alipore Magistrate. The Alipore Magistrate had no jurisdiction to try him for the specific offences. It was not disputed that the conspiracy itself was alleged to have been entered into within the jurisdiction of the Alipore Police Magistrate. The Alipore Police Magistrate had, therefore, jurisdiction to try the charge of conspiracy. This Court held that the contention that if a conspiracy is entered into District A and acts are committed in pursuance of that conspiracy in District B, the Magistrate of District A can try the offence of conspiracy but cannot try the accused in the same trial for offences committed outside his District is correct. They observed that unless there is something to be found in Chapter XV which would enable the Magistrate in Alipore to try the accused for offences committed outside his jurisdiction the mere fact that the offences could have been tried jointly under Section 239, Cr. P. C., if committed within his jurisdiction, will not give him jurisdiction to try them. Holding further that there was no provision in Chapter XV which would enable the Magistrate in Alipore to try the accused for offences under Sections 411 an ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to try the charge of conspiracy merely because the conspiracy and different acts of cheating might form part of the same transaction and that the charges in respect of them might be tried together. It can have jurisdiction only in respect of the acts of cheating alleged to have been committed within its jurisdiction. 20. We are not concerned in this case whether the Magistrate at Pollachi might be held to have jurisdiction to try the conspiracy charge by virtue of Section 180 or Section 182 of the Criminal Procedure Code. What has to be noticed is that in this case also the view was taken that the Magistrate who has jurisdiction to try some of the offences committed in the course of the same transaction does not by that alone acquire jurisdiction, because of Section 235 Criminal Procedure Code, to try other offences committed outside the local limits of his jurisdiction. 21. There appears to be no case in any of the Courts of this country which has so far taken a view different from that taken in Bisseswar's case AIR1924Cal1034 . 22. In this connection it is necessary to take into consideration the fact that when the legislature undertook the task of revising the Cri ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... bly and on the accepted principles of interpretation be put there. There is, in my opinion, a lacuna in the provisions as regards jurisdiction and it is well worth the consideration of the legislature whether, in Section 235 and Section 239, suitable words should be introduced to provide that a Magistrate having jurisdiction to try any of the offences which may be tried together will have jurisdiction to try all of them. It is not for us, the Court, to read such words into these Sections that will be legislating and not interpreting. 25. The referring Judges have suggested action under Section 185 of the Criminal Procedure Code. It appears to be clear, however, that Section 185 does not empower the High Court to give any Court jurisdiction to try an offence which under the law it has not got. 26. Action under Section 526 of the Criminal Procedure Code may, however, be taken in suitable cases, as that Section empowers the High Court to order that any offence be inquired into or tried by any Court not empowered under Sections 177 to 184.............. 27. For all these reasons I have come to the conclusion that the questions referred to the Full Bench should be answered thu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rds I find that Dilip Kumar Roy Choudhury was charged only with the offence of conspiracy and that there was no charge against him for any specific offence. As the Sessions Courts had jurisdiction to try the offence of conspiracy, the order of pardon tendered to Dilip Kumar was entirely with jurisdiction. 33. I would, therefore, dispose of the Rule in the following manner:-- (1) The proceedings of inquiry into the offence under Section 489D said to have been committed by Jiban Banerjee, and the order committing him to the Court of Sessions for trial For that offence, are set aside. (2) The rule in so far as it is in respect of pardon tendered to Dilip Kumar Roy Choudhury be discharged. (3) The tender of pardon to Ramani Mohan Das be set aside. R.S. BACHAWAT, J. 34. I agree. Full Bench Case No. 1 of 1959 SAILENDRA NATH GUHA RAY, J. 35. Having had the privilege of going through the judgment of my Lord, the Chief Justice and, having given fuller consideration to the matter in controversy in this reference, I agree that the view taken in Bisseswar's case AIR1924Cal1034 is correct and, also agree with the order made by my Lord. I should, however, l ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 235 and 239 themselves to-suggest that these are restricted only to cases of offences, for the trial of which the Court has territorial jurisdiction under one or the other provisions of Part A of Chapter XV, no such limitation should be read into it. What, however, we omitted to consider is that whenever there is an exception to the general rule laid down in Section 177 Cr. P.C., the exception is couched in unambiguous terms and nothing is left to inference or implication, but. the construction we were putting on Sections 235 and 239 of the Code left the matter entirely to inference or implication from the absence of any expression to indicate their limited scope. This, to my mind, reinforces the first reason assigned by my Lord, the Chief Justice, for the view he has taken. This reason is that there is nothing in these sections even to suggest that where the Court is Jacking in territorial jurisdiction under Part A of Chapter XV such jurisdiction was being conferred by them. It is true that the exceptions the general rule laid down in Section 177 of the Code of Criminal Procedure are not contained only in the other sections in part A of Chapter XV, There are exceptions to it in o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
