State vs Parkash Chand

Falshaw, C.J.—This is a revision petition filed by the State against the order of the Sessions Judge, Kapurthala, holding that a Judicial

Magistrate at Phagwara had jurisdiction to try a case instituted against Parkash Chand respondent for contravention of rule 125 (2) of the Defence of India Rules. It appears that the police instituted the case in the Court of the Judicial Magistrate at Phagwara and the State moved the Sessions

Judge for having the case tried by the Special Tribunal constituted u/s 13 of the Defence of India Act of 1962. In refusing the prayer of the State the learned Sessions Judge has relied on a decision of the Tribunal constituted at Kapurthala, consisting of his predecessor together with Mr. P.L.

Chhabra, District Magistrate, and Mr. Harnarain Singh, A. D. M., delivered on the 23rd of September, 1963 by which it was held that the jurisdiction of a First Class Magistrate and of the Tribunal to try offences for contraventions of rule 125(2) of the Defence of India Rules was

concurrent.

It is contended on behalf of the State that this view is not correct. Section 13 of the Defence of India Act provides in sub-section (1) that the

State Government may, for the whole or any part of the State, constitute one or more Special Tribunals which or each of which shall consist of three members appointed by that Government. The other sub-sections deal with the qualifications of persons to be appointed. Section 14 reads:

During the period during which the proclamation of Emergency is in operation, the State Government may, by general or special order, direct that a

Special Tribunal shall try any offence:

(a) under any rule made u/s 3, or

(b) punishable with death, imprisonment for life or imprisonment for a term which may extend to ten years u/s 5 of this Act or under sub-section (4)

of section 5 of the Indian Official Secrets Act, 1923, as amended by section 6 of this Act, tribal by any Court having jurisdiction within the local limits of the jurisdiction of the Special Tribunal and may in any such order direct the transfer to the Special Tribunal of any particular case from any other Special Tribunal or any other criminal Court not being a High Court.

A notification was issued by the Punjab Government in a Gazette Extraordinary, dated the 7th of January 1963 by which Special Tribunals were created in 16 Districts in this State. As item No. 9 appears the Special Tribunal for the areas comprised in the District of Kapurthala, the Special

Tribunal consisting of the District & Session? Judge, the District Magistrate and the Senior Subordinate Judge'' all of whom were named. Column

5 specifies the offences which shall be tried by the Special Tribunal, and these are exactly on the lines set out above in section 14. The Defense of

India Rules of 1962, including rule 125, sub-rule (2) of which is alleged to have been contravened in the present case, are specifically framed in exercise of the powers conferred by section 3 of the Act It is therefore clear that any of the offences specified in section 14 and in the notification in this case must be tried by the Special Tribunal so long as the Proclamation of the state of Emergency remains in force, and I accordingly accept the revision petition and order that the case against Parkash Chand under rule 125(2) of the Defence of India Rules be tried by the Special

Tribunal.