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

1966 Supreme(All) 89

W.BROOME, SATISHCHANDRA
Bailey Singh – Appellant
Versus
State of U. P. – Respondent


Advocates:
A.B. Saran, for Petitioner; N.D. Pant, Standing Counsel, for Respondents.

Judgement

SATISH CHANDRA, J. :- This and the two companion petitions under Art. 226 of the Constitution challenge the constitutional vires of the Opium Act (Act XIII of 1857) whereunder the respondents have completely banned the cultivation of poppy in pargana Jaunsar Bawar in the district of Dehradun.

2. The petitioners state that they are the residents of pargana Jaunsar Bawar, Tehsil Chakrata, district Dehra Dun and carry on the occupation of agricultural cultivation in small hilly fields. From times immemorial the petitioners and their ancestors have been cultivating poppy for purposes of using its seed as staple food. It is alleged that poppy is used for preparing Chapati, Dal and even Chatni. Before 1950 there was absolutely no restriction upon the cultivation of poppy for purposes of extraction of opium or for seeds. With the enactment to the Opium and Revenue Laws (Extension of Application) Act, 1950, the Opium Act, 1857 was extended to the Pargana of Jaunsar Bawar. Section 8 of the Opium Act provides for the issue of licences to cultivators who may choose to engage in cultivating poppy. The petitioners allege that even after the Opium Act became applicable, the inhabitants o






















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