JUDGMENT

Thomas, J.-A Division Bench of the High Court of Bombay has ventured to disagree with a ratio which has become locus classicus and well stood the long period of half-a-century. That ratio is the one laid down in the celebrated decision in Pulikuri Kottaya and Ors. vs. Emperor (AIR 1947 Privy Council 67). In that exercise the Division Bench of the Bombay High Court had unwittingly overlooked another legal guideline delineated by a Full Bench of the Bombay High Court itself in State of Bombay vs. Chhaganlal Gangaram Lavar (AIR 1955 Bombay 1) wherein Chief Justice Chagla speaking for the Full Bench had said thus:-

"so long as the Supreme Court does not take a different view from the view taken by the Privy Council, the decisions of the Privy Council are still binding upon us, and when we say that the decisions of the Privy Council are binding upon us, what is binding is not merely the point actually decided but an opinion expressed by the Privy Council, which opinion is expressed after careful consideration of all the arguments and which is deliberately and advisedly given."

2. Quite possibly the attention of the learned Judges of the Division Bench of the High Court would no