LAWS(CAL)-1988-1-10

STATE OF W B Vs. MOHON GHOSH

Decided On January 18, 1988
STATE OF WEST BENGAL Appellant
V/S
MOHON GHOSH Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revisional application is directed against the order No. 4 dated 15-9-81 passed by Sri N.N. Bhattacharjee, Judge, Special Court, Burdwan in Special Court case No. 2 of 81. What happened was that the Opposite Party Mohan Ghosh in his capacity as a Public servant was alleged to have committed an offence of criminal breach of trust for which G. R. Case No. 170 of 74 was started in the Court of the learned S.D.J.M., Burdwan. Subsequently, Sri Bhattacharya, the learned Special Court Judge refused to take cognizance of the case on the ground that in the instant case "no complaint of facts constituting the offence or a police report of facts has been filed before me...... The submission of the learned Public Prosecutor that the Special Court Judge can take cognizance on the basis of an allotment order is highly misconceived, for the allotment of the case by the Government only enables the Judge to assume jurisdiction and has got nothing to do whether cognizance of the alleged offence should be taken or not...... In such circumstances, it is clear that this Court cannot take cognizance of the offence and the learned P. P. for the State has declined to submit any complaint and I have so far failed to persuade him to submit a single complaint....... I decline to take cognizance of the offence". So saying, the learned Magistrate released the, accused from the bail bond.

(2.) Being aggrieved thereby, the State of West Bengal has preferred the instant revisional application before this Court, inter alia, on the grounds that in a special Court case filing of complaint was not a necessity and that a mere allotment order was enough to empower the learned trial Judge to proceed on with the case.

(3.) Before me no one appeared on behalf of the accused/opposite party. Mr. Mondal, the learned Advocate appearing for the State has invited my attention to a Full Bench decision of this Court reported in AIR 1961 Cal 560 , which states as per majority view......