- (1.) THE subject matter of challenge in the instant criminal revision is an order passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, 1 st, Fast Track Court, jangipur, Murshidabad, in connection with the Sessions Trial No. 1 of november, 2006, arising out of Sessions Serial No. 36/04 rejecting the petitioners prayer for discharge.
(2.) MR. Joymalya Bagchi, the learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioners submitted before this Court that the impugned trial of the petitioners is wholly illegal and without jurisdiction being hit by the prohibition contained in the provisions of Section 300 (1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure and in Article 20 (2) of the Constitution. According to Mr. Bagchi, the impugned trial of the petitioners before the learned Additional Sessions Judge, First Fast track Court, Jangipur, Murshidabad is not legally permissible since over the self-same occurrence and on the same allegation the petitioners were earlier tried by the learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Second Court, Jangipur, murshidabad in T. R. 361/01 and have been acquitted and the said order of acquittal is still in force.
(3.) ON the other hand, Mr. Swapan Kumar Mallick, the learned advocate appearing on behalf of the State strenuously disputed the contentions of Mr. Bagchi and submitted that on the grounds as urged by Mr. Bagchi, the petitioners are not entitled to discharge from the impugned, trial as in the facts and circumstances of the instant case the said provisions have no manner of application and the grounds are not tenable.;