TaxTMI Login
AI OCR ✕Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →Just a moment...
AI OCR ✕Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
of 
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: (i) Whether Section 2(b) of the West Bengal Tribunals of Criminal Jurisdiction Act, 1952, which permits declaration of an area as a disturbed area even in respect of past disturbance, violates Article 14 of the Constitution of India. (ii) Whether the proviso to Section 4(1) of that Act, enabling trial of non-scheduled offences along with scheduled offences, violates Article 14 of the Constitution of India.
Issue (i): Whether Section 2(b) of the West Bengal Tribunals of Criminal Jurisdiction Act, 1952, which permits declaration of an area as a disturbed area even in respect of past disturbance, violates Article 14 of the Constitution of India.
Analysis: The majority held that the Act had a clear legislative policy, namely, speedy trial of specified offences committed in disturbed areas in the interests of public peace, tranquillity, and state security. The classification between offences committed in disturbed areas and those committed elsewhere was held to rest on intelligible differentia and to have a rational relation to the object of the Act. The fact that some offences in the specified period may already have been tried before the notification was treated as an adventitious circumstance not affecting the validity of the classification. The majority further held that offences committed during the disturbed period, even in an area later restored to peace, stood on a materially different footing from offences committed in continuously undisturbed areas.
Conclusion: Section 2(b) was held not to violate Article 14 and was upheld as valid.
Issue (ii): Whether the proviso to Section 4(1) of the West Bengal Tribunals of Criminal Jurisdiction Act, 1952, enabling trial of non-scheduled offences along with scheduled offences, violates Article 14 of the Constitution of India.
Analysis: The majority held that the proviso merely conferred discretion on the tribunal to try minor or allied offences together with the scheduled offence. Since such joinder was treated as an ordinary incident of criminal trial and did not create an arbitrary classification, it was not regarded as discriminatory. The provision was seen as ancillary to the valid special procedure created for scheduled offences.
Conclusion: The proviso to Section 4(1) was held not to violate Article 14 and was upheld as valid.
Final Conclusion: The impugned provisions were sustained on the basis of reasonable classification and rational nexus with the object of the legislation, so the High Court's order was affirmed. The dissenting opinion would have struck down Section 2(b) in so far as it applied the Act to past disturbances.
Ratio Decidendi: A special criminal procedure will withstand challenge under Article 14 if the legislature's classification is founded on intelligible differentia having a rational nexus with the statutory object, and incidental differences in procedure or the timing of notification do not invalidate the law unless the classification itself is arbitrary.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
