9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (1) TMI 1661X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n repealed and replaced by the 1973 CrPC, could not affect the situation. We approve the view taken by the High Courts of Gujarat, Delhi, Allahabad and Madras in Vinod Rao, Sant Ram, Mata Sewak Upadhyay and P. Ramakrishnan and disapprove the view taken by the High Court of Allahabad in Pankaj Shukla. Notification dated 27-6-1973 read with Notification dated 5-7-1973 are operative in the area mentioned therein - Appeal allowed. - Criminal Appeal No. 73-74 Of 2017 - - - Dated:- 10-1-2017 - Adarsh Kumar Goel And Uday U. Lalit, JJ. Manoj Goel and Shuvodeep Roy, Advocates, for the Appellant; Siddharth Bhatnagar, Sidharth Mohan, Ms Garima Tiwari and T. Mahipal, Advocates, for the Respondents. Order ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ication dated 27-6-1973 and corrigendum dated 5-7-1973 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 1973 saves only the notifications issued under the said Code of 1898. The notifications issued under the said Act of 1932 were not saved. In any event, the effect of Notification dated 27-6-1973 read with corrigendum dated 5-7-1973 was that the said Code of 1898 stood amended and the offences punishable under certain sections of the Penal Code were made cognizable and non-bailable. The said Code of 1898 was repealed by the said Code of 1973 and under the said Code of 1973, Section 506 was made a non-cognizable and bailable offence. It is pertinent t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Union Territory of Goa, Daman and Diu shall be cognizable; and (ii) any offence punishable under Section 188 or 506 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 shall be non-bailable when committed within the Union Territory of Goa, Daman and Diu. G.M Sardessai, Under-Secretary (Home) Panaji, 27-6-1973 8. Section 10 of the Criminal Law Amendment Act, 1932, under which the said Notification has been issued, is as follows: 10. Power of State Government to make certain offences cognizable and non-bailable.-(1) The [State Government]3 may, by notification in the [Official Gazette]4, declare that any offence punishable under Sections 186, 188, 189, 190, 228, 295-A, 298, 505, 506 or 507 of the Indian ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rovision so re-enacted. (2) Where before the fifteenth day of August, 1947, any Act of Parliament of the United Kingdom repealed and re-enacted, with or without modification, any provision of a former enactment, then reference in any Central Act or in any Regulation or instrument to the provision so repealed shall, unless a different intention appears, be construed as references to the provision so re-enacted. In these circumstances, we are unable to sustain the view taken in the impugned orders. 10. It is pointed out by the learned counsel for the appellant that a contra view has been taken by the High Courts of Gujarat, Delhi, Allahabad and Madras in Vinod Rao v. State of Gujarat Vinod Rao v. State of Gujarat, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... The expression instrument used in Section 8 of the General Clauses Act, 1897, in our opinion, necessarily includes a notification such as the impugned notification. Therefore, applying the rule of construction laid down in Section 8 of the General Clauses Act, 1897, we read both in Section 10 of the Criminal Law Amendment Act, 1932 and in the impugned notification reference to CrPC, 1898, as a reference to CrPC, 1973. Therefore, the effect of the notification issued under Section 10 in 1937 is to modify the relevant provisions in CrPC, 1973. Therefore, the notification of 1937 as well as the subsequent notification issued in 1970 are relevant to the instant case. Contra view is on lines of the impugned order, relevant part of w ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
