JUDGMENT :

1. Leave granted. These appeals have been preferred against Judgments and Orders passed by the High Court of Bombay at Goa on 21st July, 2010 and 27th July, 2010 in Criminal Writ Petition No. 38 of 2009 and in review petition, Stamp Number (Appln.) No. 1918 of 2010 in Crl. W.P. No. 38/2009 respectively.

2. The question raised before the High Court was whether notification issued Under Section 10 of the Criminal Law Amendment Act, 1932 (a Central Legislation), declaring Sections 186, 188, 189, 228, 295-A, 298, 505 or 507 of the Indian Penal Code 1860 (45 of 1860) when committed in the Union Territory of Goa (now State), Daman and Diu, to be cognizable and Sections 188 or 506 of the Indian Penal Code to be non-bailable when committed, in the said territory.

3. The contention, in support of the challenge, was that such a notification would be repugnant to the provision of Code of Criminal Procedure and the State could not issue a notification in conflict with the Central Legislation.

4. On the other hand, the said Notification was supported with the plea that the same was issued under the Central Law and the question of repugnancy does not arise when the Central Law itself permits the State to issue such a notification.

5. The High Court upheld the challenge as follows:

It must be noted here that the notification dated 27th June, 1973 and corrigendum dated 5th July, 1973 were issued in exercise of power Under Section 10 of the said Act of 1932. Clause (b) of Sub-section (2) of Section 484 of the said Code of Criminal Procedure of 1973 saves only the notifications issued under the said Code of Criminal Procedure of 1898. The notifications issued under the said Act of 1932 were not saved. In any event, the effect of notification dated 27th June, 1973 read with corrigendum dated 5th July, 1973 was that the said Code of Criminal Procedure of 1898 stood amended and the offences punishable under certain sections of the Indian Penal Code were made cognizable and non-bailable. The said Code of Criminal Procedure of 1898 was repealed by the said Code of Criminal Procedure of 1973 and under the said Code of Criminal Procedure of 1973, Section 506 was made a non-cognizable and bailable offence. It is pertinent to note that prior to27thJune, 1973, the offence punishable Under Section 188 of the Indian Penal Code was non-cognizable under the said Code of Criminal Procedure of 1898. However, the said Code of Criminal Procedure of 1973 made the said offence cognizable. Similarly, prior to 27th June, 1973, in the State of Goa, the offence punishable Under Section 295-A of the Indian Penal Code was non-cognizable, but under the said Code of Criminal Procedure of 1973, it was made cognizable. As stated earlier, the notification dated 27th June, 1973, had the effect of amending the said Code of Criminal Procedure of 1898 for making the offence punishable Under Section 506 of the Indian Penal Code cognizable and non-bailable. On 1st April, 1974, the said Code of Criminal Procedure of 1898 was repealed. Under the said Code of Criminal Procedure of 1973, the offence punishable Under Section 506 of the Indian Penal Code is non-cognizable. Therefore, from 1st April, 1974 onwards, the offence punishable Under Section 506 of the Indian Penal Code is a non-cognizable offence.

We have heard learned Counsel for the parties.

The Notification in question is as follows:

"Home Department..........

Notification

HD. 44-104/73-A

In exercise of the powers conferred by Sub-section (1) and (2) of Section 10 of Criminal Law Amendment Act, 1932 (23 of 1932) the Lt. Governor of Goa, Daman and Diu hereby declares that:-

(i) notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898, any offence punishable Under Sections 186, 188, 189, 228, 295-A, 298, 505 or 507 of the Indian Penal Code 1860 (45 of 1860) when committed within the Union Territory of Goa, Daman and Diu shall be cognizable; and

(ii) any offence punishable Under Section 188 or 506 of the Indian P