LAWS(KAR)-1951-6-7

D. SRINIVASIAH AND OTHERS Vs. GOVERNMENT OF MYSORE

Decided On June 27, 1951
D. Srinivasiah Appellant
V/S
GOVERNMENT OF MYSORE Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a revision petition against the judgment in criminal Appeal No. 233 of 50 -51 on the file of the Sessions Judge, Bangalore, confirming the conviction and sentence passed by the City Magistrate, Bangalore, in C.C. No. 1672/50 -51 under Section 188, I. P. C. and sentencing the petitioners -accused to undergo simple imprisonment, for 7 days.

(2.) THE case against the petitioners is that the District Magistrate, Bangalore, issued a prohibitory order under Section 144, Cr. P. C., on 3 -10 -1950 prohibiting the assemblages and processions of more than 6 persons and all demonstrations shouting of slogans etc., for a period of 15 days within the limits of the City of Bangalore Municipal Corporation, and that the petitioners went in a procession defying the prohibitory order and as such the Police arrested the petitioners and placed a charge sheet for an offence under Section 188, I. P. C.

(3.) IT will be noticed that Section 188, I. P. C. requires four ingredients: (1) there must be an order promulgated by a public servant, (2) the public servant must have been lawfully empowered to promulgate such order, (3) a person must disobey such an order and (4) such disobedience must cause or tend to cause obstruction, annoyance, or injury, or risk of it, to any person lawfully employed, or danger to human life, health or safety, or a riot or affray. In this case, there is evidence to satisfy the first three ingredients. Evidently there was an order duly promulgated by an Officer duly empowered to do so and the accused knowingly disobeyed it. However, before the accused could be convicted of an offence under Section 188,1. P C., it must be shown that their disobedience caused or tended to cause obstruction, annoyance or injury etc., as stated in the section itself. There is no evidence to show that the disobedience tended to cause obstruction annoyance or injury or risk of obstruction, annoyance or injury to any person lawfully employed as was argued.