SATINDRA NATH SEN Vs. EMPEROR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an application under Section 526, Criminal P.C., on behalf of Satindra Nath Sen and 13 others for transfer of certain proceedings that are pending against them under Section 110, Clauses (e) and (f), Criminal P.C. from the file of the District Magistrate of Barisal before whom those proceedings are now pending.

(2.) The proceedings, when they were first started, were being heard by a Magistrate of that District, Mr. B.R. Sen, and an application was made to this Court for transfer of these proceedings from the file of Mr. Sen to the file of some other Magistrate in the district, to this Court. That application was heard by my learned brothers C.C. Ghose, J and Jack, J., on 17th July 1929, and the learned Judges said in that case that having regard to the peculiar circumstances of the cases in which the present accused had been involved and in order to allay whatever suspicions or apprehensions might exist in the minds of the petitioners it was desirable that the case should be transferred from the file of Mr. Sen to the file of Mr. Hutchings, the District Magistrate. It was pointed out in that judgment that as against Mr. Hutchings nothing had been suggested and nothing could be suggested and the learned Judges were satisfied that if the case went to him, and was tried by him from the point which had been reached before Mr. Sen, adequate justice would be done to the accused. In that view, the learned Judges directed a transfer of the proceedings to the file of Mr. Hutchings. Mr. A.K. Basu, Government Counsel who is now appearing on behalf of the Crown was also then representing the Crown and he assented to that order of the learned Judges, dated 17 July. The matter was, accordingly being heard by Mr. Hutchings, the District Magistrate and up to now about 91 witnesses have been examined for the prosecution and cross-examined. During the course of these proceedings it appears that Mr. Hutchings, the learned District Magistrate, gave out in the course of a conversation with Mr. N.R. Das Gupta, counsel for the petitioners, outside the Court that he had personal knowledge of certain matters in respect of which these proceedings had been initiated. I shall advert to these matters in detail later.

(3.) After this information was communicated by Mr. Hutchings outside the Court, to the learned Counsel, it appears that a petition was put in before the learned District Magistrate in which it was stated that the District Magistrate should not try the case and that the petitioners intended making an application for transfer to the High Court because of three reasons. It was said first that the learned District Magistrate had personal knowledge of certain incidents in the Barisal Exhibition, and some of the overt acts in connexion with that Exhibition which form some of the charges on which these proceedings under Section 110 are based. It was pointed out, in the second place, that the learned District Magistrate had outside knowledge in respect of incidents in connexion with the Laukati Union and he knew all the state of affairs in respect of that Union the incidents in connexion with which form the subject matter of some of the overt acts in respect of the Section 110 proceedings. It was further pointed out that the learned District Magistrate, in the third place, had acquired certain knowledge in connexion with the incidents the subject matter of controversy in the Section 110 proceedings from certain confidential report of Mr. Blandy, who was the previous Magistrate of the district.