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

1951 Supreme(All) 70

DESAI
SETH JUGMENDAR DAS – Appellant
Versus
STATE – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
D.P.UMYAL, G.S.PATHAK, J.K.Lal, R.S.PATHAK

DESAI, J.

( 1 ) THE applicants are being prosecuted under Section 120b, I. P. C. and Rules 81 (4) and 121, defence of India Rules, for entering into a conspiracy and infringing the provisions of the non-ferrous Metals Control Order of 1942. They are said to have committed the offence in the years 1943 to 1945. The offence remained under investigation for a long period and the prosecution was launched against them on 16-1-1950. On 19-4-1950 they pressed before the trial ct. that their prosecution could not be continued for various reasons, the most important being that the Defence of India Act and Rules have expired and the Govt. of India Act, 1935 has been repealed by the Const. The trial Ct. held that there was no bar to the continuance of the prosecution and refused their request to quash the proceedings. They went up in revision against this order to the Ses. J. The learned Sess. J. contented himself with pouring encomia on the trial ct. for its elaborate order and refused to do anything in the matter. So they have come up to this ct. in revision.

( 2 ) THE control order that is said to have been infringed by the applicants was made in exercise of the powers conferred by the Def





























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