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

1950 Supreme(All) 71

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
Raghubar Dayal and P. L. Bhargava, J.
HARPAL SINGH - Appellant
Versus
STATE - Respondents
Criminal Misc. Case 203 Of 1950
Decided On : 03/17/1950

Headnote:

The detention of the applicant was challenged on the ground that it was illegal and in contravention of the provisions of the constitution. The court held that the detention was illegal and ordered the release of the applicant.

Fact of the Case:

The applicant was arrested on 29th May 1949. On 6th June 1949, the Provincial Government made an order for his detection for a period of six months under Section 3 (1) (a) of the United provinces Maintenance of Public Order (Temporary) Act (IV [4] of 1947 ). He was detained, in central Prison, Bareilly, up to 5th December 1949, when he was transferred to Aligarh. There, on 6th December 1949, an order made by the District Magistrate of Aligarh, imposing certain restrictions and conditions under Section 3 (1) (d) and (f) of the Act, was served upon him. The order was to remain in force for six months from the date of issue, which was 4th December 1949. Cinder Section 3 (3) of the Act, he was further ordered to execute a bond and furnish two sureties for the due performance and enforcement of the restrictions and conditions specified in the order and, upon his failure to do so, he was to be committed to prison and, if already in prison, was to be detained there, under Section 123a, Criminal P. C. He did not execute the bond or furnish sureties and being already in prison was detained there under a warrant issued under section 123a of the Code.

Finding of the Court:

The court held that the detention of the applicant was illegal and ordered his release.

Issues: Whether the detention of the applicant was illegal and in contravention of the provisions of the constitution.

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the detention of the applicant was illegal and ordered his release. The court found that the provisions of Section 123a, Criminal P. C. , were inconsistent with the provisions of Articles 21, 22 (1) and (2), and 22 (4) and (5) of the Constitution of India. The court also found that the President's Order, which was made under Article 22 (7) of the Constitution, could not save the provisions of Section 123a from becoming void.

Final Decision: The court held that the detention of the applicant was illegal and ordered his release.

RAGHUBAR DAYAL, J.


( 1 ) THIS is an application under Section 491, Criminal P. C. , by Harpal Singh, security prisoner in the Central Prison, Bareilly, in the following circumstances:

( 2 ) THE applicant was arrested on 29th May 1949. The Provincial Government ordered on 6th jane 1949 his detention for six months under Section 3 (1) (a), U. P. Maintenance of Public order (Temporary) Act (IV [4] of 1947 ). He was transferred to the Central Prison, Bareilly, where he remained in detention till 6th December 1949. He was transferred to Aligarh on 6th december. There, on 6th December he was served with the order of the District Magistrate, aligarh. This order, D/-4th December 1949, directed him under Section 3 (1) (d) of the Act not to disseminate any news or propagate any opinions prejudicial to the public safety and the maintenance of public order etc. , etc. , and under section 3 (1) (f) to keep the peace and to abstain from participating directly or indirectly in any activities, subversive of law and order etc. , etc. The District Magistrate, Aligarh, further required him under Section 3, Sub-section (3) of the Act to enter into a bond in the sum of Rs. 2000 with two sureties in the sum of Rs. 1000 each for the due performance and enforcement of the restrictions and conditions specified in that order. The order was to remain in force for six months from the date of issue, which is to be presumed to be 4th December.

( 3 ) THIS order further provided that for failure to execute the bond and to furnish the sureties the applicant shall be committed to prison under Section 123a, Criminal P. C , or, if he be already in prison, be detained in prison until the period specified above expired or until he executed the bond and furnished the sureties in accordance with the order.

( 4 ) IT appears that the applicant did not execute the bond and furnish the required sureties and that, therefore, he was detained in prison by virtue of the order made under Section 128a, criminal P. C.

( 5 ) THE detention of the applicant in prison under Section 123a, Criminal P. C. , is alleged to be illegal on various grounds, which will be dealt with now.

( 6 ) THE U. P. Maintenance of Public Order Act (IV [4] of 1947) as originally passed by the legislature provided in Section 1, Sub-section (4):

"it shall, in the first instance, remain in force for a period of one year, provided that if, before the expiry of the first period of one year or any extended period, a resolution to that effect is passed by the Legislature, it shall remain in force for a further period of one year commencing from the date of such expiry. "

The Legislature passed the necessary resolution for extension at the proper time in 1948 and 1949, and the Act continued in force subsequent to 29th February 1948, when the Act completed its first year of enforcement. On 1st July 1949 the Governor of the United Provinces passed U. P. Ordinance II [2] of 1949. Section 2 of this Ordinance provided that for Sub-section (4) of Section 1 of U. P. Act IV [4] of 1917, the following shall be and be deemed always to have been substituted: " (4) it shall remain is force upto the 31st day of March 1950", and Section 3, clause (a) of the Ordinance was:"for removal of doubts, it is hereby declared that, notwithstanding anything contained in sub-section (4) of Section 1 of the principal Act, as it existed immediately before the commencement o! this ordinance, the said Act shall not be deemed to have expired on 29th february 1948 or on any subsequent date on the ground that the duration of the Act had been extended otherwise than by an Act of the Provincial Legislature,"

( 7 ) SUBSEQUENTLY the U. P. Maintenance of Public Order (Proceedings Validation) Act, XI [11] of 1949 came into force on 12th August 1949. Its Section 2 and Section 8 (a) practically correspond to Sections 2 and 3 of the aforesaid Ordinance, with the exception that 1951 replaces 1950 in S. 1, sub-section (4)

( 8 ) IT was contended for the applic

































































































































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 Back to top