JATIRAM PANJA Vs. STATE OF WEST BENGAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revisional application must succeed and it is needless to go into much details. Suffice it to say that there was an order for forfeiture and penalty against the surety against that the petitioner who is an advocates clerk moved the Sessions Judge. The learned Additional Sessions Judge, Howrah, who heard the matter dismissed the application of the petitioner, treating it as criminal motion.

(2.) Mr. Ahin Auddy, the learned advocate appearing for the petitioner has contended that the order of the learned Additional Sessions Judge cannot be sustained on the face of it, because he treated it as a revisional application, although appeal under section 449 of the Cr. P .C. did lie and even his own prayer was in the form of appeal.

(3.) Mrs. Soya Banerjee, the learned advocate appearing for the State has also submitted that the judgment of the learned Additional Sessions Judge cannot be supported.