https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=272559 Quashing of an allotment to a Special Judge was treated as rendering that allotment non est, with the result that the original court's jurisdiction revived and the proceedings remained pending before the Chief Presidency Magistrate on the relevant commencement date. On that footing, the statutory bar under section 12 applied to prevent transfer of a pending matter to the Special Judge. A later allotment and fresh charge-sheet relating to the same occurrence, accused, and substantially the same offences could not create a new proceeding in substance and would amount to an evasion of the bar. The special court allotment was therefore invalid for that purpose. en-us Tue, 27 Nov 1962 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 08 May 2018 12:32:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=272559 Quashing of an allotment to a Special Judge was treated as rendering that allotment non est, with the result that the original court's jurisdiction revived and the proceedings remained pending before the Chief Presidency Magistrate on the relevant commencement date. On that footing, the statutory bar under section 12 applied to prevent transfer of a pending matter to the Special Judge. A later allotment and fresh charge-sheet relating to the same occurrence, accused, and substantially the same offences could not create a new proceeding in substance and would amount to an evasion of the bar. The special court allotment was therefore invalid for that purpose. Case-Laws Indian Laws Tue, 27 Nov 1962 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=272559