STATE OF WEST BENGAL versus JUGAL KISHORE MORE & ANR.

STATE OF WEST BENGAL versus JUGAL KISHORE MORE & ANR.

The Chief Presidency Magistrate had the power to issue a warrant for More's arrest due to prima facie evidence, and the extradition procedure followed was not illegal. The Fugitive Offenders Act, 1881, though unenforceable in India post-Republic, could be relied upon by Commonwealth countries for extradition, and the Extradition Act, 1962, did not bar diplomatic requisitions for extradition if the foreign authority was willing to comply.

Parties
Appellant: State of West Bengal; Respondent: Jugal Kishore More
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
10 January 1969
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal by Special Leave From the Judgment and Order Dated April 20, 1967 of the Calcutta High Court in Criminal Revision No. 502 of 1966
Outcome
Appeal allowed; order of the High Court set aside; writ petition dismissed.
Legal Topics
Extradition, Fugitive Offenders, Procedure for Securing Extradition, Sovereignty and Jurisdiction
Criminal Law International Law Extradition Fugitive Offenders Procedure for Securing Extradition Sovereignty and Jurisdiction

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 5 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

State of West Bengal

Appellant

Jugal Kishore More

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal by Special Leave From the Judgment and Order Dated April 20, 1967 of the Calcutta High Court in Criminal Revision No. 502 of 1966

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Chief Presidency Magistrate had power to issue the warrant for More's arrest with extra-territorial operation
  2. 2 Whether the Fugitive Offenders Act, 1881, having ceased to be part of Indian law, could be resorted to for extradition
  3. 3 Whether Government instructions for extradition invade judicial authority

Ratio Decidendi

The Chief Presidency Magistrate had the power to issue a warrant for More's arrest due to prima facie evidence, and the extradition procedure followed was not illegal. The Fugitive Offenders Act, 1881, though unenforceable in India post-Republic, could be relied upon by Commonwealth countries for extradition, and the Extradition Act, 1962, did not bar diplomatic requisitions for extradition if the foreign authority was willing to comply.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; order of the High Court set aside; writ petition dismissed.

Orders

  • The order passed by the High Court is set aside.
  • The writ petition filed by More is dismissed.