Date not established
Conviction
ConcludedThe trial court convicted the accused police personnel, as recorded in the Calcutta High Court judgment.
Conviction · Supports allegation.
Source: AIR 1956 Cal 116
Not yet re-checked.
CW-1955-0002Nadia, West BengalJudgment 6 December 1955
Ranaghat Police Constable vs The State
The judgment of the Calcutta High Court records the following account. On 25 April 1954 constable, on duty on Ranaghat station platform, accused traveller a Ranaghat man of blackmarketing two mats, marched him toward the GRP station, demanded money and took his purse containing Rs. 5. A Ranaghat man immediately complained to nearby witnesses, identified the constable on the platform, and lodged the FIR at the GRP station. The Special Court, Nadia convicted the constable under Section 161 IPC and fined him Rs. 100. The court believed the eyewitnesses, held the ingredients of Section 161 proved, rejected the extortion-only argument and the challenge to the Special Court trial, affirmed the conviction and retained the fine. Matters not addressed in the cited judgment text are not recorded here.
Externally reportedV2
What this record means
This page documents a court-adjudicated case from the judgment and cited sources below. Findings are attributed to the court; this record does not add findings of its own.
How verification works →Detailed record
Report card
By judgment dated 6 December 1955, the Calcutta High Court (Coram: Debabrata Mookerjee, J.) affirmed the conviction of the Constable, Ranaghat Government Railway Police Station.
- Register number
- WB 51 CW 0001
- Case reference
- AIR 1956 Cal 116
- Court and date
- Calcutta High Court (Coram: Debabrata Mookerjee, J.), 6 December 1955
- Officer(s) at the material time
- Constable, Ranaghat Government Railway Police Station
- Present service status
- Not ascertained from the cited sources.
- Provisions invoked
- Section 161 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860
- Finding of the Court (extract)
- “Taking the entire evidence as a whole I think there is no ground for interference with the conviction of the appellant.” (at para 12)
- Verdict, sentence and quantum
- Conviction upheld. Sentence: fine.
- Present status of the proceedings
- No further proceedings are recorded in the cited sources; the judgment is the concluded position shown.
Compiled from the judgment and the cited sources. Findings are those of the court; this card adds none of its own.
Current position
The Calcutta High Court judgment dated 6 December 1955 is the concluded position shown in the cited sources.
Evidence position
Recorded allegations
OtherPrimary
Material fact supported
Reliable material supports a specifically documented fact relevant to that allegation, not necessarily the full allegation, causation, intent, unlawfulness, or responsibility.
Official finding: supports allegation.
Attributed to the court
What the court found
Holding not recorded separately.
“Taking the entire evidence as a whole I think there is no ground for interference with the conviction of the appellant.” (para 12)
Separate from verification
Institutional response
6 Dec 1955
Order issued
ConcludedThe Calcutta High Court dismissed the appeal and upheld the convictions of police personnel.
Conviction · Supports allegation (appellate affirmance; trial conviction separate card).
Source: AIR 1956 Cal 116
Not yet re-checked.
Continuing record
Follow-up history
19 Sep 2026
(Round-8 full re-verification: published record re-checked against the judgment text (outcome, officers, quote, key facts) plus methodology-compliance pass; skills-guided adversarial re-verification of the published record against the judgment text (reverify/t1-*/adversarial-8.jsonl))
Corrections (0): No corrections recorded.
Review: Solo Staff combined review (one combined attestation) — not yet recorded.