STATE OF BOMBAY Vs. SALAT PRAGJI KARARNSI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE judgment of the court was deliver- ed by

(2.) TWO important questions arise for decision in this case of a small magnitude and the State has filed this appeal not for the purpose of obtaining a conviction but because of the importance of the questions raised and implications of the judgment of the Judicial Commissioner. The respondent was convicted of an offence under s. 12(a) of the Bombay Prevention of Gambling Act (Act IV of 1887 hereinafter termed the Bombay Act) as applied to Kutch and was sentenced to a fine of Rs. 50.00 or in default simple imprisonment for 15 days and for- feiture of the amounts recovered from the respondent at the time of the commission of the offence. He took a' revision to the Judicial Commissioner of Kutch, who hold that the Act under which the respondent had been convicted had not been validly extended to and was not. in force in the State of Kutch. It is the correctness of this decision which has been canvassed before us.

(3.) THE Second Schedule gives the parts of the pre-1947 Indian States which were to comprise the Chief Commissioner's Province of Kutch. Under el. 4 of this Order all laws which were in force including orders made under s. 4 of the Extra Provincial Jurisdiction Act of 1947, were to continue in force until replaced.