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

1962 Supreme(Raj) 10

BHARGAVA
Saiyad Afjal Hussain – Appellant
Versus
State – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
Guman Mal Lodha, for Petitioners; S.N.Gurtu, Assistant Govt. Advocate, for State

BHARGAVA, J.—This is an application in revision by Saiyad Afjal Hussain, Chand Mohammed, Budha and Likhmi Ram against their convictions under sec. 5 of the Essential Services Maintenance Ordinance, 1960. Each of them was sentenced to two months rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 100/-, in default of payment of fine to further rigorous imprisonment for one month by the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Ratangarh. The learned Additional Sessions Judge, Churu has upheld the convictions. They were all employees in the Railway Department. The sentence beyond that already undergone by them has been remitted by the orders of the Governor of Rajasthan and they have also been reinstated in their posts. The revision application was pressed only on the ground that the stigma of conviction always remains in case it was not set aside.

2 It is well-known that the employees of the Indian Government in the Essential Services had put forward certain demands, which not having been met, they gave notice to go on strike on a certain date. In order that the threatened strike may not impede the essential services and the normal life of the community, an Ordinance (No. 1 of 1960) known as the Essential Serv

















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