PHILLIPS, W.AYLING
Emperor – Appellant
Versus
Govindarajulu – Respondent
1. The accused in this case was prosecuted for disorderly behaviour in a place of public resort (to wit, the grounds of the Madras Harbour), an offence under Section 75 of the Madras City Police Act. He has been acquitted on the ground that the harbour premises do not constitute a place of public resort. In our opinion the Presidency Magistrate has taken too narrow a view of the law. It is true that the by-laws framed, under the Port Trust provide for prosecution as trespassers of persons who enter on the harbour premises without having business there or with the ships lying in the harbour: and from the Magistrates judgment it appears that such people (as he says, mainly coolies, or up-country visitors) are actually prosecuted before him. But it is perfectly clear from the statement of objects and reasons for the amended by-laws printed in G.O. No. 841, Marine, dated 22nd October 1912, that By-law 22 which provides for the exclusion of the general public, was not intended to be enforced against respectable people. The trustees say:
We cannot pretend to keep respectable people entirely out of our premises during working hours, simply because it would be intolerable for them t
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.