T A MENON Vs. KING

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN 1934 the appellant was appointed to the INdian Civil Service. During 1943 he was employed as Additional District Magistrate at Midnapore, and while so employed he was concerned in the investigation of a charge of bribery against Dr. Panda, a sub assistant surgeon of the Bengal Nagpur Railway. While the case against Dr. Panda was still under investigation, the appellant was transferred from Midnapore and he went to Calcutta where he stayed for a time. It was alleged that on December 20, 1943, while in Calcutta he received a bribe from Dr. Panda and he was suspended. On July 6, 1945, the following order was made by the Governor of Bengal: IN exercise of the powers conferred by Sub-section (1) (b) and Sub-section (2) of Section 197 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (Act V of 1898) the Governor is pleased to accord sanction to the prosecution, of Mr. T. A. Menon of the INdian Civil Service under suspension in respect of (a) an offence under Section 161 of the INdian Penal Code. (b) an offence under Section 165 of the INdian Penal Code. (c) an offence under Section 420 of the INdian Penal Code. (d) an offence under Section 120b of the INdian Penal Code read with Section 161 of the INdian Penal Code. (e) an offence under Section 120b of the INdian Penal Code read with Section 165 of the INdian Penal Code. (f) an offence under Section 120 B of the INdian Penal Code read with Section 420 of the INdian Penal Code. (g) Any other offence or offences as may be found to have been committed by him, and to direct that the trial of the case should be held in the Court of the Chief Presidency Magistrate, Calcutta.

(2.) IMMEDIATELY thereafter proceedings were instituted against the appellant in the Court of the Chief Presidency Magistrate who took cognisance of the case. The appellant objected to the jurisdiction of this Court, but before anything further was done an order was made by the Legislative Department of the Government of India as follows: In exercise of the powers conferred by Sub-section (1) of Section 5 of the Criminal Law Amendment Ordinance of 1943 (XXix of 1943) the Central Government is pleased to allot for trial to the First Tribunal with Headquarters at Calcutta the case specified in the Schedule hereto annexed.

(3.) THE appellant and his clerk were tried by the Tribunal, and on April 25, 1946, both were convicted and sentenced. THE appellant appealed against this conviction to the High Court at Fort William: on February 14, 1947, his appeal was dismissed. On July 3, 1947, the appellant was by Order in Council granted special leave to appeal to His Majesty in Council. THE terms of this Order are important because they limit the grounds on which the appellant is entitled to base his appeal. THE report of the Judicial Committee which was approved by the Order in Council and is quoted there begins by narrating the procedure in the case and proceeds: that the petitioner" (now the appellant) "submits that the trial by the Tribunal was invalid by reason of the fact that the sanction granted by the Governor was a sanction for the prosecution of the petitioner in the Court of the Chief Presidency Magistrate and not by the Tribunal.