RONGSENG SANGMA Vs. STATE OF ASSAM
LAWS(GAU)-1970-11-1
HIGH COURT OF GAUHATI
Decided on November 20,1970

Rongseng Sangma Appellant
VERSUS
STATE OF ASSAM Respondents

JUDGEMENT

M.C.PATHAK,J. - (1.) BY this application Under Section 439, Criminal Procedure Code and/or Rule 22 of the Rules for the Administration of Justice and Police in the Garo Hills District the petitioner has challenged the order passed by the Deputy Commissioner, Garo Hills in Criminal Revision No. 10 of 1968.
(2.) THE police submitted charge -sheet against the petitioner Under Section 435, Indian Penal Code on 19 -5 -1965. Thereafter on 14 -7 -1965 charge Under Section 435, Indian Penal Code was framed against the accused petitioner, to which he pleaded not guilty. The case dragged on and some prosecution witnesses were examined. On 28 -6 -1968 the learned Assistant to the Deputy Commissioner and Magistrate, First Class, Garo Hills passed the following order: " The accused is present. The I.O. is absent in spite of receiving summons. No step is taken. It appears that W/A is to be issued to the I/O. But I don't want to put the I/O into unnecessary trouble. The prosecution is not interested with the case. The case is therefore dropped and the accused is discharged. Against this order the State filed a revision petition before the learned Deputy Commissioner on 13 -8 -1968. The learned Deputy Commissioner by his order dated 16 -5 -1969 set aside the order of discharge dated 28 -6 -1968 and remanded the case for trial from the stage where it was left by the learned trial court. The petitioner has challenged this order of the learned Deputy Commissioner by this revision petition.
(3.) MR . K. P. Sen, the learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that there is no revisional power in such a matter under Rule 22 (2) of the Rules for the Administration of Justice and Police in the Garo Hills District. The order passed by the trial court on 28 -6 -1968 discharging the accused is either an order of acquittal or an order of discharge. But Under Section 251 -A, Criminal Procedure Code there is no provision of discharge after an accused is charged. Since the Criminal Procedure Code is applicable in spirit only in the Garo Hills, this order of the trial court may be interpreted as an order of acquittal and in that case an appeal lies from the order under Rule 22 -A, which provides as follows :†" - 22 -A. The Governor may direct an appeal to be presented to the High Court from an original or appellate order of acquittal passed by any Court other than the High Court. Admittedly no such appeal has been filed against this order of the trial court. ;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.