AnwarAl

iSar
kar

Fact
s:
Therespondentand49otherper
sonswerechargedwithvari
ousoff
ences
al
legedtohavebeencommi tt
edbythem i
nthecourseofthei
rrai
dasanarmed
gangonacer tai
nfact
oryknownastheJessopFactor
yatDum Dum,andt hey
wereconvict
edandsentencedtovar
yingt
ermsofimprisonmentbytheSpeci
al
1
Court

TheSt
ateofWestBengal
vs.AnwarAl
iSar
kar(
11.
01.
1952-SC):
MANU/SC/0033/
1952

I
mpor
tantf
ort
hef
oll
owi
ngr
easons

I
. LAI
DOUTTHETESTFORREASONABLECLASSI
FICATI
ON

I
I. SPECI
FICSOFTHEACTANDTHEI
RISSUES

Pr
eambl
e
The Actisinsti
tut
ed "An Actto provi
de f
ort he speediertr
ialofcert
ain
off
ences"
,andt hepreambledeclaresthat"
iti
sexpedi enttoprovi
deforthe
speedi
ertr
ialofcer
tai
noffences"
.

Theissueherewaswi thregar
dtotheactnotbei
ngvagueandambigiousand
notspecif
ying exactci
rcumst
ancesandleavi
ng i
topentodiscr
eti
on,which
ther
ebymadei tuncon
TheCourthasagr eed wit
hthepropositi
ont hatconf
ermentofdi
screti
onary
poweron the execut
ive whi
ch i
nt he absence ofany pol
i
cy orguidel
ines
per
mit
sittopi
ckandchoosei sunconst
it
utional.

Sect
ion3
Secti
on 3 empowersthe St
ate Gover
nmentby not
if
icat
ion i
nthe of
fi
cial
gazett
etoconst
it
uteSpeci
alCour
ts,and

1
Par
a2
Sect
ion4
sect
ion4providesf
ortheappoi
ntmentofspeci
alj
udgestopresi
deoversuch
cour
ts,Sect
ion5,whoseconst
it
uti
onal
it
yisi
mpugned,runst
hus:

5(1)ASpeci alCour
tshal
ltrysuchof
fencesorcl
assesofoff
encesorcasesor
cl
assesofcases,ast heStateGover
nmentmaybygener alorspeci
alor
derin
wri
ting,di
rect.

(2)Nodi r
ect
ionshal
lbemadeundersub-section(
1)forthetr
ialofanof
fence
forwhichanaccusedper sonwasbei ngtr
iedatthecommencementoft his
Actbef or
eanycotbutsaveasaf or
esai
d,suchdirect
ionmaybemadei n
respectofanoffence,whethersuchoff
encewascommi t
tedbeforeorafter
t
hecommencementoft hi
sAct .
"

Pr
eambl
e

Opi
nions
Har
ri J2
esC.
M.Pat
anj
aliSast
ri
,C.
J.
I
ntent
ionofst
ate(
Cont
radi
ctsDas)
Par
a7
Thepurposeofsect
ion5(1
)wast
odefi
nethejur
isdi
cti
onofaspeci
alcour
t
undert
heact,rat
herthant
hepower
sconf
erredonitbytheSt
ateGovernment
.
Theobj
ectoft
heactwast
opr
ovi
def
orspeedi
ert
ri
alsbyusi
ngaspeci
alcour
t
syst
em
thepur poseofsect i
on5( 1)istodef inethejuri
sdi
cti
onofaspeci alcourt
appoi ntedundertheActandnott hescopeoft hepowerconf er
redont heStat
e
Gover nmentt oref
ercasest osuchcour t
.Asthever yobj
ectoft heActwast o
providef orspeedi
ertrial
sbyi nsti
tuti
ngasyst em ofspecialcourtswi t
ha
simplifi
edandshor tenedpr ocedur e,iti
sreasonabletoconcludet hat,sofaras
thelegislatur
ewasconcer ned,itsintenti
onwast hatcourtsconstit
utedunder
theActandappl yi
ngsuchpr ocedur eshoulddeal onl
ywithcasesr equir
ing
speedi ertri
alandthat,accordingly,theStateGovernmentshoul dr efertosuch
courtsonl ycasesofthatdescr ipt
ion.
Theti
tl
eandthepreambl
easwel l
astheotherspeci
ficprovisi
onsoftheAct
her
einquest
ionshowunmist
akablyt
hatthewholeobj ectandpurposeofthe
l
egisl
ati
onwastodevi
semachineryf
or"speedi
ertri
alofcertai
noffences"
,

2
Par
a5
(whichmustmeant ri
alofcasesi
nvolvi
ngt hecommi ssi
onofcertai
noffences
astherecan,ofcourse,benotri
alofoffencesi
ntheabst ract
)andthegeneral
expressi
onsusedinprovidi
ngforthepowert osetthatmachineryi
noperati
on
mustber est
ri
ctedtothatendinaccordancewiththeintenti
onofthel
egisl
atur
e
Par
a10
I
tisi nt
eresti
ngt ofi
ndthatthet r
endofr ecentdecisi
onsinAmer i
cahasbeent o
l
eanst ronglyt owar
dsustai
ni ngStateactionbothinthelegi
sl
ati
veandint he
admi ni
strati
vespheresagainstat t
acksbasedonhost i
l
ediscri
minat
ion.
Classif
icati
oncondemnedasdi scri
minatoryhavebeensubsequentlyupheldas
beingwi thi
nt hepowersoft helegisl
atur
e.InTignerv.Texas310U.S.141,the
maj ori
tyview inConnol
ly'
scase
Par
a15
I
fthediscr
etiongiventotheStateGovernmentshouldbeexer
cisedimproperl
y
orar
bit
rari
ly,theadmini
strat
iveacti
onmaybechal l
engedasdiscri
minat
ory,but
i
tcannotaffecttheconst
itut
ional
it
yofthelaw.
Sai
yidFazlAl
i
,J
Par
a22
Spokeaboutt hepr i
nci
pleslai
doutbyChir
anji
tLal
Chowdhur yandF.N.Bal sara
cases,tounderstandThemeani ngandscopeofarti
cle1
4.Onepr i
ncipl
ebei ng,
art
icl
e1 4designedtoprotectalli
ndi
vi
dual
slacedinsimi
larci
rcumstances
againstl
egisl
ati
vediscri
minati
on.
(4)Themeani ngandscopeofar t
icle14havebeenexpl ainedinChiranji
tLal
Chowdhur yv.TheUni onofIndiaandOt hersandTheSt ateofBombayand
Anot herv.F.N.Bal saraandt heprincipleslaiddowni nt hosedecisi
onshavet o
bekepti nvi ewi ndeci di
ngthepr esentcase.Oneoft hesepr i
nci
ples,isthat
arti
cle14isdesi gnedt oprotectal
lper sonspl acedinsimi l
arci
rcumst ances
againstlegislativedi scri
minati
on,andi fthelegisl
aturetakescaretor easonably
classif
yper sonsf orlegisl
ati
vepur posesandi fitdealsequall
ywi t
hal lpersons
belongingtoawel l
-def i
nedclass,itisnotopent othechar geofdeni alofequal
protecti
onont hegr oundt hatthelaw doesnotappl ytootherperson

Par
a24and25
Speedi
ert
ri
ali
ssues
Themaini
ssuebeingdespi
test
ati
ngt
heneedf
oraspeedi
ert
ri
al,t
heactdi
d
notf
oll
owanyoftheguidel
i
neslai
doutbyt
hef
ramer
softheI
PC.
theframer soft heCr i
minalPr ocedureCode( whi chisher ei
nafterrefer r
edtoas
"theCode" )alsower eali
vet othedesi rabi
li
tyofhavi ngaspeedyt r
ial i
ncertai
n
classesofcases,andwi t
ht hisendi nviewt heymadef ourdi ff
erentset sof
provisionsf orthet r
ialoffourclassesofcases,t hesebei ngpr ovi
sionsr elat
ing
tosummar ytrials,t
ri
alofsummonscases,t ri
alofwar rantcasesandt ri
alof
casest riablebyacour tofsessi on.Broadlyspeaki ng,theirclassi
ficationofthe
offencesf ort hepur poseofappl yi
ngt hesedifferentsetsofpr ovisionswas
accor dingtot hegr avit
yoft heof fences,thoughi nclassifyi
ngt heof fencesfit
f
orsummarytri
alt
heexperi
enceandpoweroft
het
ryi
ngMagi
str
atewasal
so
t
akeni
ntoconsi
derat
ion.
Thenetr esul
tofthesepr ovi
si
onsi sthatoffenceswhicharesummar il
ytri
able
canbemor espeedi l
yt ri
edthansummonscases,summonscasescanbemor e
speedil
yt r
iedthanwar r
antcases,andwar rantcasescanbemor espeedil
y
tri
edthansessionscases.Thef ramer softheCodeappeart ohavebeen
generall
yoft heviewt hatthegravert heoffencethemoreelaborateshouldbe
theproceduref orit
strial,whi
chwasundoubt edl
yanunderstandablepointof
view,andnoonehassuggest edthatt hei
rclassi
fi
cat
ionofoffencesfort
hef our
diff
erentmodesoft r
ialtowhichr eferencehasbeenmadei sunreasonablein
anysense.

25.Thei mpugnedActhascompl etelyignoredt hepri

nci
pleofcl
assifi
cati
on
foll
owedi ntheCodeandi tproceedst olaydownanew pr ocedurewithout
maki nganyat tempttoparti
culari
zeorcl assif
yt heoff
encesorcasest owhichit
i
st oapply.Indeedsect i
on5oft heAct ,whichi sthemostvit
alsecti
on,baldl
y
statesthatthe" Speci
alCourtshallt
rysuchof fencesorcl
assesofoffencesor
casesorcl assesofcases,ast heSt ateGover nmentmay,begener alorspecial
orderinwr i
tingdirect
."

Themaini
ssuebeingdespi
test
ati
ngt
heneedf
oraspeedi
ert
ri
al,t
heactdi
d
notf
oll
owanyoftheguidel
i
neslai
doutbyt
hef
ramer
softheI
PC.
Par
a27
Thosewhocoul dbet r
iedundertheact,coul
dal sobetriedunderthecode,
withtheactputti
ngtheaccusedinaamuchmor edi
sadvantageousposit
ion
thanthecode( wit
hregardtodefendinghi
msel f
).Theissuewast hatt
herewas
nor at
ional
egiventomakeitdist
inctandarbi
traryanddi scr
eti
onarypowerslay
withthegovernment
Healsoraisedthat
,thosewhocoul dbetri
edundertheact,couldal
sobet r
ied
undert
hecode,wi ththeactputti
ngtheaccusedinamuchmor e
di
sadvantageouspositi
onthanthecode( wi
thregar
dt odefendi
nghimself
).The
i
ssuewast hatther
ewasnor ati
onal
egiventomakei tdi
sti
nctandarbi
tr
aryand
di
scret
ionarypowerslaywiththegovernment.

M.
C.Mahaj
an,J.
Par
a35
Spokeaboutsect
ion5bei
ngarbi
tr
aryandthati
tgavenor
easonf
ori
ts
di
ff
erent
iat
ionoft
reat
mentbet
weenvariouscases.
Secti
on5oft heWestBengalSpecialCour
tsActishitbyart
icl
e1 4ofthe
Consti
tuti
oninasmuchasitmentionsnobasisforthedif
fer
entialt
reatment
prescr
ibedintheActf
ort
ri
alofcri
mi nal
sincert
aincasesandf orcert
ain
of
fences.
Par
a37– Hespokeaboutar
bit
rar
ycl
assi
fi
cat
ion
Heheldthattheclassi
fi
cat
ionpermissi
blemustbebasedonsomer ealand
subst
anti
aldi
sti
nctionbear
ingajustandr easonabl
er el
ati
ontotheobject
s
soughtt
obeat tai
nedandcannotbemadear bit
rar
il
yandwi t
houtany
subst
anti
albasi
s.
Classifi
cationthusmeanssegr egationinclasseswhichhaveasyst ematic
relati
on,usual l
yf oundincommonpr opert
iesandchar act
eristi
cs.I
tpostul
atesa
rationalbasisanddoesnotmeanher dingtogetherofcertai
nper sonsand
classesar bit
rari
ly.Thusthel egisl
aturemayf ixtheageatwhi chpersonsshall
bedeemedcompet enttocont r
actbet weent hemselves,butnoonewi l
lcl
aim
thatcompet encyt ocontractcanbemadet odependupont hestatureorcolour
oft hehair."Suchascl assifi
cationforsuchapur posewoul dbear bit
rar
yanda
pieceofl egisl
ativedespot i
sm

Par
a38
Rat
ional
ebehi
ndspeedyt
ri
alnotbei
ngaval
i
dgr
oundf
orcl
assi
fi
cat
ion
MahajanandChakr avart
iwereinagreementt
hatthenecessi
tyofaspeedytr
ial
asst
atedintheactwast oovagueanduncert
ain,t
ofor
mt hebasisf
oravali
d
andreasonabl
eclassif
icati
on.
I
twasnotbasedonanychar acteri
sti
cthatisspecif
ictoani ndi
vi
dual,andjust
becausesomet hi
ngiscl
assi
fied,doesn’tmeant hatitclear
sthearti
cle1
4t est
.
I
tsti
llneedst obebaseduponar easonablegroundonsomedi ffer
encewhi ch
bearsaj ustandproperr
elat
iontot heatt
empt edclassif
icati
onandisnota
merear bit
rarysel
ecti
on

Speedyt rial
isnocl assifi
cati
onatalli
nthereal senseofthet erm asitisnot
basedonanychar acterist
icswhicharepeculiartopersonsort ocaseswhi ch
aretobesubj ecttot hespeci al
procedureprescr i
bedbyt heAct .Themer efact
ofclassi
ficati
oni snotsuf f
ici
enttorel
i
eveast atutefrom t
her eachoft he
equali
tyclauseofar t
icle14.Togetoutofitsreachi tmustappeart hatnotonly
aclassif
icati
onhasbeenmadebutal sothatitisonebaseduponar easonable
groundonsomedi fferencewhi chbearsajustandpr operr el
ati
ont othe
att
empt edcl assi
ficationandi snotamer earbitrarysel
ection

Aspoi ntedoutbyChakr avart

iJ.thenecessi
tyofaspeedyt r
iali
st oovagueand
uncertainacr i
teri
ont oformthebasisofaval i
dandr easonableclassif
ication.
I
nt hewor dsofDasGupt aJ.iti
stooindefi
nit
east herecanhar dlybeany
defini
teobj ect
ivetesttodetermineit
.Inmyopi ni
on,iti
snocl assifi
cati
onatal l
i
nt hereal senseoft heterm asiti
snotbasedonanychar acteri
sticswhi chare
peculi
art opersonsort ocaseswhi charetobesubj ecttothespeci al
pr ocedure
prescribedbyt heAct .Themer efactofcl
assif
icat
ionisnotsuffici
enttor eli
eve
astatutefrom t hereachoftheequal i
tycl
auseofar t
icl
e14.Togetoutofi t
s
reachitmustappeart hatnotonlyaclassi
fi
cationhasbeenmadebutal sothat
i
tisonebaseduponar easonablegroundonsomedi f
ferencewhi chbear sa
j
ustandpr operr el
ationtot heatt
emptedclassifi
cati
onandi snotamer e
arbit
rarysel
ect i
on.Personsconcer nedinoffencesorcasesneedi ngso-cal l
ed
speediertri
alareent i
tl
edtoi nqui
re"Whyaret heybeingmadet hesubj ectofa
l
aw whi chhasshor t-cir
cuitedthenormalprocedur eoftri
al;whyhasi tgrouped
them inthatcategoryandwhyhast hel
aw depr i
vedthem oft hepr otectionand
safeguardswhi char eall
owedi nthecaseofaccusedt ri
edundert hepr ocedure
ment i
onedint heCr i
minalPr ocedur
eCode;whatmakest hel egisl
atureort he
executivetothinkthattheircasesneedspeedi ertr
ialt
hant hoseofot her sli
ke
them?

Par
a40
Unlessaval
idreasonbehindt
hecl
assi
fi
cat
ionf
or“speedyt
ri
al” canbe
shown,thest
atuteshoul
dbedeemedunconsti
tut
ional
.
Thepr otecti
onaf for
dbyt hearti
clei
snotamer eeye-washbuti ti
sar ealone
andunl essaj ustcausef ordiscr
iminat
ionont hebasi
sofar easonable
classif
icati
oni sputforthasadef ence,thestatut
ehastobedecl ared
unconst i
tuti
onal.Noj ustcausehasbeenshowni nthepresentinstance.The
resulti
st hattheappeal sfai
landar edi
smi ssed.

B.
K.Mukher
jea,J
Par
a45
Held:Theclassi
fi
cati
onshouldneverbear bi
trar
y,art
ifi
cialorevasi
ve.I
tmust
r
estalwaysuponr ealandsubstant
ialdi
sti
nct
ionbearingar easonableandj
ust
r
elati
ontothethi
ngi nrespectt
owhi chthecl
assifi
cat
ioni smade.

Addr
essedi
ntent
ion– par
a47
howeverbadt heint
ent
ionmaybe,ifi
tineff
ectdoesnotpr
oducether
esul
tof
di
scri
minat
ion,thenthelegi
sl
ati
onwil
lnotbestr
uckdownbecauseoft
he
i
neff
ecti
veintenti
on.
Par
a52
Howt
heactcoul
dhavebeenmadeval
i
d
I
ftheStat
eGovernmenthaddir
ect
edcert
ainoffencesorclassesofoff
ences
commit
tedwithi
ntheter
ri
tor
yofWestBengalt
obet ri
edbyt heSpecial
Court
,
thel
aw oror
dercoul
dnothavebeenimpeachedasdiscri
minatory.

SudhiRanj
anDas,J.
I
nordertopasst
hetest
,twocondi
ti
onsmustbeful
fi
ll
ed,namely,t
hatthe
cl
assi
fi
cati
onmustbefoundedonanint
ell
i
gibl
edi
ff
erent
iawhichdist
ingui
shes
t
hosethatar
egr oupedtoget
herfrom ot
her
sandthatt
hatdif
fer
enti
amusthave
arat
ional
rel
ati
ont otheobj
ectsoughttobeachi
evedbytheAct.
Thedi
fferent
iawhi
chist
hebasi
softheclassi
fi
cati
onandt
heobj
ectoftheAct
aredi
sti
nctthi
ngsandwhati
snecessar
yisthatther
emustbeanexusbetween
them.

hol
dst hati
fastat
utebri
ngsabouti nequal
i
ty,i
nfactandsubstance,i
twil
lbe
i
ll
ogicalandhi
ghlyundesi
rabletomaket heconsti
tut
ional
i
tyofsuchastatut
e
dependont hedegreeofinequali
tysobroughtabout.
N.Chandr
asekhar
aAi
yar
,J.
Par
a69
Procedur
all
aw mayanddoesconferver
yval
uabl
eri
ghtsonaperson,andt
hei
r
prot
ecti
onmustbeasmucht heobj
ectofacour
t'
ssol
ici
tudeast
hose
confer
redundersubst
ant
ivel
aw.
Rei
ter
atedasbef
ore