SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

1950 Supreme(Bom) 37

R.S.BAVDEKAR, M.C.CHAGLA, J.C.SHAH
Keshav Madhav Menon – Appellant
Versus
N. R – Respondent


Judgment

Chagla, C.J.

1. The petitioner is being prosecuted before the learned Chief Presidency Magistrate for having contravened Section 18 (1), Press (Emergency Powers) Act, 1931, and the application of the petitioner is that the prosecution should be quashed inasmuch as Section 18 (1), Press (Emergency Powers) Act, 1931, is void and of no effect as contravening Article 19 of the Constitution.

2. Now, before we consider whether Section 18 (1) contravenes a fundamental right which has been granted to the subjects under our Constitution, we have to decide whether we have any jurisdiction at this stage to consider this matter when the case is still pending before the learned Chief Presidency Magistrate. Reliance is placed by the petitioner upon Article 228 of the Constitution, and that article provides :

"If the High Court is satisfied that a case pending in a Court subordinate to it involves a substantial question of law as to the interpretation of the Constitution the determination of which is necessary for the disposal of the case, it shall withdraw the case and shall deal with it as laid down in that article," and the submission made to us by the Advocate General is that the case pe









Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top