Case Details

Citation(s)
1963 SLG 3459 = 1963 SLD 3459 = 1963 PLD 357
Dacca High Court
Criminal Reference No. 295 of 1961, decided on 29th January 1960.
Presented By: Sattar and Sikandar Ali, JJ
A. Rab and Syed Muhammad Ali : In support of Reference.   A. Aziz: In opposition to Reference.

JAGADISH CHANDRA ROY-Complainant  

VERSUS

  JOYNARAYAN BISWAS AND OTHERS-Accused

Law: Penal Code (XLV of 1860)

Section: 420

(a) Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S. 420-Complaint of cheating by person other than one actually defrauded-Valid-Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), S. 4 (h) read with S. 190.   Surendra Nath Saha v. The State P L D 1960 Dacca 528 not approved.   Sahibzada Muhammad Hayat Khan v. Crhulam Muhammad (1954) 6 D L R (WPC)177 rel.   22 Cr. L J 672 distinguished,   (b) Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), Ss. 195 to 199 read with S. 190-Sections 195 to 199 provide for exceptions to general rule laid down in S. 190. JUDGMENT   SATDAR, J.-This Reference under section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure is by the Sessions Judge of Jessore. The learned Judge has recommended that the order dated the 3rd of April 1961, summoning some accused persons under section 420 of the Pakistan Penal Code by the Sub-Divisional Officer should be set aside as the petition of complaint on which the above order was passed was not filed by the person alleged to have been cheated by the accused.   2. The facts of this case are that a First Information Report was lodged by one Jagadish Chandra Roy with the Police alleging that his aunt, Aruna Bala Dassi, had been cheated by the accused persons in respect of certain transactions. The Police rafter investigation submitted final report and also submitted that Jagadish Chandra Roy should be proceeded against under section 5.1 (sic) of the Pakistan Penal Code. A Naraji petition was filed by Jagadish Chandra Roy which was sent for enquiry to the Medical Officer, Gobra Charitable Dispensary. On receipt of the report the learned Sub-Divisional Officer by his order, the 3rd of April 1961, summoned the accused person under section 420 of the Pakistan Penal Code. The learned Judge has made the present Reference for setting aside the above order on the ground that as the petition of complaint was not filed by Aruna Bala Dassi herself but by her nephew Jagadish Chandra Roy, the learned Sub- Divisional Officer had no jurisdiction to summon the accused person. This view has been taken by the learned Sessions Judge presumably on the basis of a decision of this Court in the case of Surendra Nath Saha v. The State (P L D 1960 Dacca…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register