JOGENDRA KUMAR NAG Vs. EMPEROR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The two petitioners before us have been ordered in a joint trial, by the Sub-Divisional Officer of Jamalpur, to give security for their good behaviour for one year on the finding that they were by habit thieves and burglars. The order was upheld on appeal by the District Magistrate. The matter came before this Court, when a re hearing of the appeal was directed, mainly on the grounds, that the Magistrate had not properly considered the question whether a joint trial of the petitioners was legal, and that he had improperly relied on the keeping of history sheets by the Police and on the fact that the Superintendent of Police had concluded that the case was not the result of party faction.

(2.) The appeal was re-heard and the order of the Sub-Divisional officer upheld, with the result that the petitioners again came to this Court and obtained the present Rule on points which, in substance, amount to two, viz., that there was no legal evidence to establish association which alone would justify a joint trial, with the subordinate point that in any case so far as the enquiry was one under Section 110(f) the joint trial was illegal, and that on the facts the order was not Justifiable.

(3.) The first-hand evidence to prove association is not very strong : of course, evidence of repute is useless for the purpose of proving associated, but there is evidence which, if believed, as the Magistrate seems to have, would justify the joint trial.