DIN DAYAL SHARMA vs THE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH

The Supreme Court held that the Assistant Sessions Judge had jurisdiction to try the appellant under Section 5(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947 and Section 161 of the Indian Penal Code, despite the trial occurring after the Criminal Law (Amendment) Act, 1952 came into force. The Court clarified that Section 10 of the 1952 Act only transferred cases pending before Magistrates to Special Judges, not those already committed to the Court of Session. Furthermore, the conviction was upheld as the appellant could not raise the objection regarding the investigation's validity at a later stage, having failed to do so earlier in the proceedings.