Patanjali, J. This is an appeal from a judgment of the High Court of Judicature at Bombay dismissing an appeal from a conviction and sentence by the Presidency Magistrate, Fifth Court, Bombay, for an offence under the Bombay, Abkari Act (V of 1878).

2. The appellant was charged with having in her possession in contravention of the Act, a quantity of foreign liquor (White Label Scotch Whisky) in excess of the limit permitted under a Government notification dated 20th July 1948, issued under the Act, and she was convicted and sentenced to a term of three months rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 500/- or in default to a further term of 6 weeks rigorous imprisonment. On appeal to the High Court her main contention was that the Provincial Legislature had no power under the Government of India Act, 1935, to legislate with respect to the possession of foreign liquors and that S. 14-B of the Bombay Abkari Act, as amended by the Bombay Abkari (Amendment) Act ( XXIX of 1947 ), in so far as it purported to restrict or prohibit the possession of such liquors was void and inoperative. These and other contentions raised on her behalf were rejected and the conviction and sentence were confirmed, but in view of the constitutional question involved a certificate under Sec. 205(1) of the Constitution Act was granted. The appellant has accordingly brought this appeal to have that question determined by this court.

3. To appreciate the arguments advanced on behalf of the appellant it is necessary to give a brief account of the history of the Bombay Abkari Act. It was enacted in 1878 to "consolidate and amend the law relating to the import, export, transport, manufacture, sale and possession of liquor and of intoxicating drugs in the Presidency of Bombay". The act was amended from time to time and, after the Constitution Act came into force, certain adaptations and modifications were made by the Government of India ( Adaptation of Indian Laws ) Order, 1937, to bring its provisions into accord with those of the Constitution Act as provided for in S. 293 thereof. One of such modifications was the substitution of new definitions of the expressions "to import" and "to export." Whereas these expressions previously meant simply the bringing into and taking out of the Presidency of Bombay, under the new clause (10) of S. 3 they mean respectively the bringing into and taking out the Presidency "otherwise than across a customs frontier as defined by the Central Government." This modification had to be made because under the Constitution Act the exclusive power to legislate with respect to import and export across such frontiers was in the Federal Legislature. Further amendments in the Act were effected in 1940 with a view to supersede a pronouncement by a Special Bench of the High Court in Chinubhai Lalbhai vs. Emperor (1942 F. C. R. 17) that the Provincial Government had no power under S. 14-B to prohibit the possession of intoxicants as there was nothing in the Act, as it appeared to them, to suggest that total prohibition as a measure of social reform was contemplated by the Legislature. The Bombay Abkari (Amendment) Act, 1940, was accordingly passed by the Governor of Bombay who had assumed legislative powers by a proclamation under S. 93 of the Constitution Act. Besides inserting in the preamble to the original Act words making it clear that it was part of the object of the Act to enforce the policy of prohibition, it effected two important amendments in S. 14-B which, before the amendments, stood thus :

"14-B. (1) No person not being a licensed manufacturer or vendor of any intoxicant or hemp and no licensed vendor except as authorised by his license shall have in his possession any quantity of any intoxicant or hemp in excess of such limit as the Provincial Government under S. 17 may declare to be the limit of retail sale except under a permit from the Collector:

Provided that nothing in subsection (1) shall extend to any foreign liquor, other tha

Click Here to Read the rest of this document