Case Details

Citation(s)
1960 SLG 188 1960 SLD 188 1960 PLD 943
Dacca High Court
Writ Petition No. 48 of 1959, decision Dated: 15-03-1960.
SATTAR, JUSTICE
Petitioner(s) by: Moirrul Huq
Respondent(s) by: K. M. Subhan

MUHAMMAD MUZAMMIL ALI

VS

A. F. M. A. MAJID, SPECIAL MAGISTRATE (FOOD) SYLHET

Law: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)

Section: 234

Certiorari Trial held in patent violation of S. 234, Cr. P. C. (V of 1898) Fit case for issue of writ. The accused was charged under three heads. The first charge was that he on or about 1 5 57 to 25 2 58 did not maintain or grant voucher of his purchase of rice and paddy and thereby con¬travened clause 6 (a) of the East Bengal Foodstuffs Price Control and Anti Hoarding Order, 1953, and thereby committed an offence under section 6 (1) of Act I of 1956. The other two charges were pertaining to offences under the said Act for violation of clause 2 of the said Order. It was contended that the first charge clearly indicated that the accused was proceeded against under that charge for more than one act of omission or commission and so it was in regard to more than one offence and the same taken together with the other two charges constituted more than three offences and, therefore, the trial was held in disregard of the provisions of section 234 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1898. Held, that having regard to the first accusation under the first head, there could be no doubt that the accused was charged for acts of omission or commission in respect of more than one transaction and the same taken together with the other two charges constituted more than three offences and it was, therefore, patent that the trial was held in violation of section 234 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1898 and so it was a fit case in which a writ of certiorari should issue quashing the conviction of the accused. Queen Empress v. Mati Lal Lahiri I L R 27 Cal. 560 ref. THIS JUDGMENT DELIVERED BY: SATTAR, J. This Rule was obtained by the petitioner against his conviction by the respondent under section 6 (1) of Art 1 of 1956. He was sentenced to pay a fine of Rs. 300, in default of payment to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 4 months. 2. The accusations against the petitioner were: (a) that he, on or about 1 5 57 to 25 2 58, at Kalighat, police-station Kotwali, did not maintain or grant voucher of his purchase of rice and paddy and thereby contravened clause 6 (a) of the East Bengal Food Stuffs Price Control and Anti Hoarding Order, 1953, and thereby committed an offence under section 6…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register

Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492