The State Government Notification No.
Appeal from the Judgment and order dated the 21st November, 1970 of the Gujarat High Court in Criminal Revision Applications Nos.
When the trial was about to companymence in these cases, the accused moved applications raising an objection that the Magistrate had numberjurisdiction to try the offences as he had number been specially empowered as required by s. 2 c of the Act.
Against that decision of the High Court, the State has number filed these appeals on a certificate granted by the High Court under Article 134 1 c of the Constitution.
Aggrieved, the accused filed two revisions Cr.
R. 321 and 322 of 1969 in the High Court of Gujarat.
212 213/71.
N. Anand and M. N. Shroff for the Appellant.
H. Hingorani and Mrs. K. Hingorani for the Respondent The Judgment of the Court was delivered by SARKARIA, J. Controversy in these appeals centres round the interpretation of the words specially empowered appearing in s. 2 c of the Suppression of Immoral Traffic in Women and Girls Act, 1956 to be hereinafter referred to as the Act .
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Criminal Appeal Nos.
Both 1078 of them together with Bai Hamida Basi Mohammed, respondent 3 herein, are accused 1, 2 and 3 respectively, in a trial for offences punishable under ss.
321 and 322 of 1969.
Cases Nos.
The facts giving rise to these appeals are as follows Chaturbhuj Maganlal and Bai Sabita, respondents herein, are husband and wife residing together at Parvati Bhuvan, Rajkot.
5 and 6 of the Act before the Judicial Magistrate, First Class Rajkot in Cr.
1372 and 1404 of 1968.
