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

1956 Supreme(All) 115

H.S.CHATURVEDI, MULLA
STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH – Appellant
Versus
BABOO LAL – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
S.N.TRIVEDI, Tej Narain

MULLA, J.

( 1 ) THIS is a reference made by the Additional City Magistrate, Lucknow, under Section 432, Cr. P. C. for a decision on a point of law whether the Dramatic Performances Act (Act 19 of 1876)has become void or not in view of Article 13, Constitution of India.

( 2 ) IT was contended before the Magistrate that the above mentioned enactment had become inconsistent with the fundamental rights regarding freedom of speech and expression guaranteed to every citizen under Article 19, Constitution of India. The learned Magistrate in his reference observed :

". . . . . . . . it is debatable that the Dramatic Performances Act, 1876 is inconsistent with the provisions of Part III of the Constitution of India and I consider that the said Act is invalid. The question of the validity of the Dramatic Performances Act is necessary to be determined for the disposal of this case. "

( 3 ) THE reference came up for hearing before one of us and as the question to be decided was whether an existing enactment had become void or not, it was referred to a divisional Bench of this Court.

( 4 ) WE will now give the facts of the case which led to the reference.


( 5 ) THE late Munshi Prem Chand was one






































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