A. S. KRISHNA versus STATE OF MADRAS.

A. S. KRISHNA versus STATE OF MADRAS.

The impugned provisions (sections 4(2), 28-32) are wholly ancillary to legislation on intoxicating liquors under Entry 31, List II, Schedule 7 of the Government of India Act, 1935; thus, they fall within exclusive provincial legislative competence, and questions of repugnancy under section 107 do not arise. The presumptions in section 4(2) do not violate Article 14 as they reasonably relate to the offences created and apply equally to all persons similarly situated.

Parties
Appellant: A. S. Krishna; Respondent: State of Madras
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
28 November 1956
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeals (with Connected Appeals) by Special Leave / Appeal From Madras High Court Judgment in Criminal Revision Cases Nos. 57 60 of 1954 and Case Referred Nos. 2 5 of 1954, Decided May 7, 1954
Outcome
Appeals dismissed.
Legal Topics
Legislative Competency, Repugnancy, Pith and Substance Doctrine, Equality Before Law, Presumptions in Criminal Statutes
Constitutional Law Criminal Law Legislative Competency Repugnancy Pith and Substance Doctrine Equality Before Law Presumptions in Criminal Statutes

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

A. S. Krishna

Appellant

State of Madras

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeals (with Connected Appeals) by Special Leave / Appeal From Madras High Court Judgment in Criminal Revision Cases Nos. 57 60 of 1954 and Case Referred Nos. 2 5 of 1954, Decided May 7, 1954

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether sections 4(2), 28, 29, 30, 31 and 32 of the Madras Prohibition Act, 1937 are unconstitutional and void under section 107(1) of the Government of India Act, 1935 for repugnancy to the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 and Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898, or Article 14 of the Constitution

Ratio Decidendi

The impugned provisions (sections 4(2), 28-32) are wholly ancillary to legislation on intoxicating liquors under Entry 31, List II, Schedule 7 of the Government of India Act, 1935; thus, they fall within exclusive provincial legislative competence, and questions of repugnancy under section 107 do not arise. The presumptions in section 4(2) do not violate Article 14 as they reasonably relate to the offences created and apply equally to all persons similarly situated.

Court Disposition

Appeals dismissed.

Orders

  • Sections 4(2), 28-32 of the Madras Prohibition Act, 1937 are constitutional and valid.