HARIDAS MUNDRA Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a reference under Section 269(1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure by a Judge of the City Sessions Court, Calcutta, reporting that the case against the accused pending before that court is such as should be dealt with by the Judge alone and should not be tried with the aid of a jury.

(2.) It appears that one Haridas Mundra and his brother-in-law Remeshwar Daga have been committed to the City Sessions Court to answer charges of conspiracy to cheat, of forgery and cognate offences in respect of a large number of shares of the British India Corporation Ltd. The case is pending trial. The learned Judge reports that in view of the volume and complexity of evidence in the case which he thinks is of a highly technical nature, it is undesirable that the charges should bo tried by a jury. It is also said that a number of witnesses from all over the country will have to be called and about 150 documents will require to be exhibited with the consequence that the trial cannot reasonably be expected to be concluded before three weeks. Accordingly, the learned Judge has reported to this Court for orders that the case be tried by the Judge himself without a jury.

(3.) Section 269 (4) provides for circumstances in which a trial by jury may be dispensed with. The sub-section is in these words :