P VENKATESWARA RAO Vs. K SATYANARAYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petnr. one P. Venkateswara Bao of Gadiwada who styles himself as the Secretary of the Town Kalavanthula Sanka-rana Sangam of Gudivada, moves this Ct. under Sections 435 & 439, Cr. P C. for setting aside the order of acquittal passed by the Addl. First Class Mag. of Bandar in C. C. No. 80 of 1949. It has to be stated at the outset that the public prosecutor has not moved this Ct. under Section 417, Cr P. C. by filing an appeal to set aside the order of acquittal. The questions to be decided are firstly whether there are sufficient grounds for interference by me; and secondly, even if there are sufficient grounds, whether the order of acquittal should be set aside at the instance of a private individual, however public-spirited he might be & however meritorious his act might be, so that he might act as a pro bona publico in the interests weal & welfare of the general community at large.

(2.) The complaint against the six resps. in the Ct. below was that they, in contravention of Sections 3 & 4, Madras Devadasis (Prevention of Dedication) Act (XXXI [31] of 1947), conducted a dancing in a specially erected pandal in front of the office of the first resp. at Gudivada, on the night of 13-4-1949 between 9 & 12 p. m. The first resp. is the proprietor of Sri Venkateswara Motor Service Co., Gadivada, with an office in the town. Eesps. 2 & 3 are unmarried ladies aged 30 & 20 years respectively belonging to Kalavantula community & are said to have dedicated their lives to the profession of dancing, Resps. 4, 5 & 6 are aaid to have taken part in the dance performance by playing tabala, harmonium, & clarionette respectively. What happened was that on the night in question, during the coarse of the celebration of the Sree Bama Navami festival, a pandal was erected in front of the motor press office of resp. l & in that pandal were installed coloured pictuies of the deities of Sree Rama, Lakshmana, & Sita & it is stated that there was a celebration of the festival on that night. Besps, 2 & 3 are said to have danced before the picture of deity between the times above mentioned. The complainant alleged that by dancing before the coloured pictures of the deities temporarily installed for the celebration of the festival in this pandal, resps. 2 & 0 have committed an offence under Section 4, Madras Act XXXI [31] of 1947 & the other resps. have abetted the commission of that offence. The learned Addl. First Class Mag., on a construction of Section 3 (3) of the Act, came to the conclusion that the coloured pictures temporarily installed before which the dancing took place were not idols or deities as contemplated by Section 3 (3) of the Act, installed in a temple or a religious institution, & therefore the dancing before such pictures did not contravene the prohibition contained in Section 3 (8) of the Act. On this ground the resps. were acquitted.

(3.) The question is what is the proper construction of Section 3 (3) Madras Act XXXI [31] of 1947 which Act, it may be premised, was enacted for the purpose of the welfare of the Kalavantula community so that its members may be wealed from prostitution & be compelled to lead a chaste & pure life. Section 3 (3) of the Act runs as follows :