Das Gupta, J. - (1.) This Rule was obtained by these petitioners against an order of Mr. G. Kumar, Presidency Magistrate, Calcutta, convicting the petitioners Under Section 116/161, Penal Code, and sentencing them to rigorous imprisonment for six months, each.
(2.) A preliminary point has been taken by Mr. Talukdar on behalf of the petitioners that the trial has been vitiated by the fact that the charge on which the petitioners were originally tried was altered after arguments of both sides had been heard and immediately before judgment was delivered, on 13th February 1950. The charge originally framed was in these words: "That you, on or about the 21st day of April 1949, at Calcutta abetted the commission by one Sri Kedar Nath Sett, Civil Supply Officer, a public servant in the department of. Civil Supplies, of an offence Under Section 161, Penal Code, punishable with imprisonment for accepting Rs. 100/-, a gratification other than legal remuneration, as a motive for forbearing to do an official act, viz., to mend the adverse note Ex. I made by the aforesaid officer in his inspection book which said offence was not committed in consequence of the abetment, and thereby committed an offence punishable Under Section 161/116, Penal Code, and within my cognizance ......"
(3.) From order No. 15, dated 13th February 1950, it appears that at the time of writing judgment, it appeared to the learned Magistrate that the charge framed was not happily worded and so he altered the charge. The order continues in these words: "As the alteration is purely a technical one, it is not likely to prejudice the accused if the case be proceeded with immediately. So, judgments will be delivered today at 3.30 p.m.";