9911796707
TMI Blog1960 (10) TMI 91X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... as convicted under s. 380 and 114 of the Indian Penal Code, and sentenced to one month's rigorous imprisonment. On October 15, 1957, the Deputy 'Commissioner of Police, Bombay, acting under s. 57(a) of the Bombay Police Act (22 of 1951), passed an order against Vishnu Ramchandra which was to operate for one year, externing him from the limits of Greater Bombay. At that time, a prosecution under s. 411 of the Indian Penal Code was pending against Vishnu Ramchandra, and he was not immediately externed, to enable him to attend the case. This prosecution came to an end on July 10, 1958, and resulted in his acquittal. Immediately afterwards, a constable took him outside the limits of Greater Bombay, and left him there. The prosecution ca ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ion 9 or 23 of the Bombay Beggars Act, 1945 (Bom. XXIII of 1945,) or under the Bombay Prevention of Prostitution Act, 1923 (Bom. XI of 1923), or (c) thrice of an offence within a period of three years under section 4 or 12A of the Bombay Prevention of Gambling Act, 1887 (Bom. IV of 1887), or under the Bombay Prohibition Act, 1949 (Bom. XXV of 1949) the Commissioner, the District Magistrate or the Sub-Divisional Magistrate specially empowered by the State Government in this behalf, if he has reason too believe that such person is likely again to engage himself in the commission of an offence similar to that for which he was convicted, may direct such person to remove himself outside the area within the local limits of his jurisdiction, by ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to operate prospectively or retrospectively has to be decided in accordance with well- settled principles. The cardinal principle is that statutes must always be interpreted prospectively, unless the language of the statutes makes them retrospective, either expressly or by necessary implication. Penal statutes which create new offences are always prospective, but penal statutes which create disabilities, though ordinarily interpreted prospectively, are sometimes interpreted retrospectively when there is a clear intendment that they are to be applied to past events. The reason why penal statutes are so construed was stated by Erle, C. J., in Midland Rly. Co. v. Pye 10 C.B. (N.S.) 179, 191 in the following words: Those whose duty it is to a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y, if the language admits such an interpretation, even though it may equally have a prospective meaning. In Queen v. Vine [1875] 10 Q.B. 195, which dealt with the disqualification of persons selling spirits by retail if convicted of felony, the Act was applied retrospectively to persons who were convicted before the Act came into operation. Cock burn, C. J., observed:- If one could see some reason for thinking that the intention of this enactment was merely to aggravate the punishment for felony by imposing this disqualification in addition, I should feel the force of Mr. Poland's argument, founded on the rule which has obtained in putting a construction upon statutes that when they are penal in their nature they are not to be const ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... med on the idea that a bankruptcy code is being constructed, and when the present tense is used, it is used, not in relation to time, but as the present tense of logic. Fry, L. J., added :- I entirely agree with Bowen, L. J., as to the meaning of the present tense in the section ; it is used, I think, to express a hypothesis, without regard to time. In Bourke v. Nutt [1894] I Q.B. 725, Lord Esher, M. R., speaking of these observations of Bowen and Fry, LL. J., observed :- the case seems to show that when the present tense is used in this statute (s. 32 of the Bankruptcy Act, 1883) the time to be considered is the time at which the Court has to act, and not the time at which the condition of things on which it has to act came into exi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... R. 1953 Bom. 183, z86, 187, the same principles were applied by Chagla, C. J. and Bhagwati, J. (as he then was), and reference was made also to The Queen v. Inhabitants of St. Mary Whitechapel [1848) 12 Q.B. 120 (B): 116 E.R. 811 where Lord Denman, C. J., in his judgment observed:- it was said that the operation of the statute was confined to persons who had become widows after the Act passed, and that the presumption against a retrospective statute being intended supported this construction; but we have before shown that the statute is in its direct operation prospective, as it relates to future removals only, and that it is not properly called a retrospective statute because a part of the requisites for its action is drawn from time a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
