Thakkar, J. - (1.) The validity of the trial of three Army Officers is in question.
(2.) The High Court has taken the view that the learned Judge presiding over the Special Court had acted without jurisdiction in taking cognizance of the case and proceeding with the trial of three Army Officers resulting in the conviction of one of them, and the acquittal of the remaining two and has quashed the proceedings. The question which calls for determination in these two allied appeals by special leave preferred by the State of West Bengal is whether the High Court was right in doing so.
(3.) The following facts are not in dispute: (1) Three accused persons who were tried by the Judge presiding over the Fourth Addl. Special Court, Calcutta (hereinafter referred to as the learned Trial Judge for the sake of brevity) were Army Officers. They were charged with offences in respect of which the ordinary Criminal Court and the Court-martial both had concurrent jurisdiction. (2) The learned Trial Judge had failed to follow the procedure prescribed by the Criminal Courts, and Court-martial (Adjustment of Jurisdiction) Rules, 1952 (referred to as Rules hereinafter) framed under S. 549(1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898 (Cr. P.C.);