Case Note & Summary
The case involved an appeal by the appellant against the order of the Trial Court which held that he could only be tried by the Court of Sessions for offences under Sections 408, 420, 467, 468, and 471 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). The controversy arose after the Code of Criminal Procedure (Madhya Pradesh Amendment) Act, 2007 amended the First Schedule of the Code, making certain offences triable only by the Sessions Court. The appellant was charged on May 18, 2007, when the offences were still triable by a Magistrate. However, the amendment came into effect on February 22, 2008, after which the appellant argued that he had a right to be tried by the Magistrate since no charge-sheet had been filed against him before the amendment. The Trial Court and subsequently the High Court rejected this argument, affirming that the case was exclusively triable by the Sessions Court as it was instituted after the amendment. The Supreme Court upheld this view, stating that the amendment did not apply retrospectively to cases pending before the Magistrate at the time of the amendment. The court emphasized that no vested right to a particular forum existed, and procedural changes are generally applied retrospectively unless specified otherwise. The appeal was ultimately dismissed, confirming the legality of the committal to the Sessions Court.
Headnote
A) Criminal Procedure - Trial Jurisdiction - Applicability of Amendment - Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, Sections 408, 420, 467, 468, 471 - The court held that the amendment shifting trial jurisdiction to the Sessions Court was not applicable to cases pending before the Magistrate as of the amendment date, thus the appellant could not claim a right to be tried by the Magistrate. The amendment was deemed prospective, affecting only cases instituted after its enactment (Paras 2-26).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the appellant could be tried by the Judicial Magistrate, First Class, for offences under IPC sections despite the amendment making them triable only by the Court of Sessions.
Final Decision
The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal, affirming that the appellant could only be tried by the Court of Sessions as the amendment was not applicable to cases pending before the Magistrate at the time of its enactment.
Law Points
- Trial jurisdiction
- retrospective application of law
- procedural law principles
- vested rights in forum
