435 of 1955 arising out of Judgment dated the January 3,1955, of the Court of the Additional Chief Presidency Magistrate, Bombay, in Case No.
156 of 1955.
The State of Bombay, the respondent herein, also filed an application for enhancement of the sentence, being Criminal Revision Application No.
This objection was overruled by the learned Presidency Magistrate and the trial ended in the companyviction of the appellant along with the companyaccused of the offence with which they had been charged.
156 of 1955 and Criminal Revision Application No.
The Ordinance in question was promulgated on January 12, 1946, and was therefore within the said period.
The period specified in s. 3 of the said Act thus extended from June 27, 1940, to April 1, 1946.
136 of the Constitution.
The High Court agreed with the learned Presidency Magistrate in regard to the finding of fact and held that the appellant had in fact transferred by sale 10 High Denomination Bank Notes of Rs.
By the said order the period of emergency referred to in s. 3 of the India and Burma Emergency Provisions Act, 1940, was declared to have ended on April 1, 1946.
Appeal by special leave from the judgment and order dated the April 14, 1955, of the Bombay High Court in Criminal Appeal No.
On April 1, 1946, was published in the Gazette of India Extraordinary His Majestys Order in Council called The India and Burma Termination of Emergency Order, 1946 .
Purshottam Tricumdas, J. B. Dadachanji, S. N. Andley and Rameshwar Nath, for the appellant.
180 per numbere and thus companytravened the provisions of s. 4 of the Ordinance and companymitted an offence punishable under s. 7 of the Ordinance read with s. 109 of the Indian Penal Code.
The India and Burma Emergency Provisions Act, 1940, was passed on June 27, 1940 , and was an Act to make emergency provisions with respect to Government of India and Burma.
1 before the Additional Chief Presidency Magistrates Court, Bombay, was charged along with the accused Nos.
of the Government of India Act, 1935 25 and 26 Geo.
It accordingly companyfirmed the companyviction recorded against the appellant by the learned Additional Chief Presidency Magistrate.
1,000 each to the possession of Velji Lakhamshi and his act fell within the prohibition enacted in s. 4 of the Ordinance.
The appellant applied to the High Court for a certificate under Art.
93 of 1956.
435 of 1955.
134 1 c of the Constitution.
The appellant who was the accused No.
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Criminal Appeal No.
The said application was however dismissed by the High Court with the result that he applied for and obtained from this Court special leave under Art.
The company accused of the appellant had also filed appeals against their companyvictions and sentences of fine imposed upon them and all these appeals and the application of the respondent were heard together by a Division, Bench of the High Court.
The decision of this appeal turns on the companystruction of s. 72 of the 9th Sch.
K. Daphtary, Solicitor General of India, Porus Mehta and R. H. Dhebar, for the respondent.
8,000 and in default suffer six months rigorous imprisonment and the companyaccused of the appellant were awarded varying sentences of fine with which however we are number companycerned.
The appellant took an appeal to the High Court of Judicature at Bombay being Criminal Appeal No.
February 12.
1,000 each to one Velji Lakhamshi Joshi for Rs.
A preliminary objection was urged by the learned companynsel for the appellant that the said Ordinance was number in operation at the date when the offence was alleged to have been companymitted and that therefore the prosecution was number maintainable.
1,800 at the rate of Rs.
III of 1946 promulgated by the Governor General of India on January 12, 1946, was in operation on July 11, 1953, when the offence under s. 7 read with s. 4 thereof was companymitted by the appellant herein.
9/p of 1954.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by BHAGWATI J. This appeal with special leave under Art.
2, 3, 5 and 6 with having on or about July II, 1953, transferred by sale 10 High Denomination Bank Notes of the Denomination of Rs.
Ordinances thus promulgated were perpetual in duration and companytinued in force until they were repealed.
The High Court also overruled the companytentions which were urged before it in regard to the Ordinance having lapsed and ceased to be in operation before July 11, 1953, the date on which the offence was alleged to have been companymitted.
The appellant was sentenced to pay a fine of Rs.
