LACHMANDAS KEWALRAM Vs. STATE OF BOMBAY HABEEB MOHAMIMD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) I regret I am unable to agree with the reasoning and conclusion of my learned brother Das J. whose judgment I have had the advantage of reading.

(2.) The appellants were convicted and sentenced to death and varying terms of imprisonment by the Special Judge, Ahmedabad, on charges of murder and other offences under the Indian Penal; Code, the Arms Act and the Bombay Police Act. The Special Judge was appointed by a notification issued under the Bombay Security Measures Act, 1947, (hereinafter referred to as the impugned Act) and on August 6, 1949, the State Government, in exercise of the powers conferred by S. 12 of the impugned Act, directed the Special Judge to try the case of the appellants who were implicated in what was known as the Central Bank Robbery Case. Charges were framed on January 13, 1950, without any preliminary enquiry and committal by a Magistrate which had been dispensed with by the impugned Act, and seventeen witnesses for the prosecution were examined before January 26, 1950, when the Constitution came into force. The proceedings continued, and after the examination of sixty witnesses in all, ended in the conviction of the appellants on March 13, 1950.

(3.) Separate appeals were preferred by the present appellants to the High Court which, however, confirmed the conviction and sentence in each case. An objection that the trial was illegal as the impugned Act was void under Art. 13 (1) of the Constitution, read with Art. 14, was overruled on the ground that those provisions had no retrospective operation and did not affect proceedings already started in the Court of the Special Judge. The learned Judges followed the decision of a Special Bench of their own Court in 'IN RE KESHAV MADHAV MENON', 52 Bom L R 540, which has since been affirmed by this Court in 'KESHAV MADHAV MENON v. STATE OF BOMBAY', 1951 S C R 228.