https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=169965 Section 350 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898 did not apply to a Special Judge trying warrant cases under Section 8 of the Criminal Law Amendment Act, 1952 because that special procedure incorporated only the warrant-case provisions specifically provided for, not the general Magistrate provision for a successor judge. The Court also treated the defect as one of fundamental incompetency, not a mere irregularity, since the judge who decided the case had not heard the evidence. Section 537 could not cure such a defect, so the conviction and sentence were set aside and the matter remitted for retrial according to law. en-us Wed, 30 Aug 1961 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 13 May 2015 14:17:50 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=169965 Section 350 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898 did not apply to a Special Judge trying warrant cases under Section 8 of the Criminal Law Amendment Act, 1952 because that special procedure incorporated only the warrant-case provisions specifically provided for, not the general Magistrate provision for a successor judge. The Court also treated the defect as one of fundamental incompetency, not a mere irregularity, since the judge who decided the case had not heard the evidence. Section 537 could not cure such a defect, so the conviction and sentence were set aside and the matter remitted for retrial according to law. Case-Laws Indian Laws Wed, 30 Aug 1961 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=169965