SARIDE NARAYANA Vs. STATE OF TAMIL NADU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The point involved in this case relates to the construction of Sections 3 and 4 of Madras Act XXXI [31] of 1947 (an Act to prevent the dedication of women as devadasis in the Province of Madras) and therefore raises a question of some importance to the Devadasi community. Accused 2 to 9 and 12 to 17 in C. C. No. 198 of 1948 on the file of the Court of the Additional First Glass Magistrate of Tanuku seek to revise the order of that Court by which each one of them has been sentenced to pay a fins of Rs. 25 or, in default, to suffer one month's simple imprisonment for having committed an offence in violation of Section 3 (2) of the said Act which is punishable under section 4 (1) of the same Act.

(2.) A complaint was filed against seventeen parsons before the lower Court for having committed the offence mentioned above, but the learned Magistrate found that the first accused was not guilty, and that accused 10 and 11, being below 16 years of age even if they had violated the provisions of Section 3 (2), cannot be held to be guilty of the offence and acquitted them also. The rest of them were convicted and sentenced as stated above.

(3.) The prosecution ease is that accused 2 to 9, who are dancing women, took part in a melam or nautch at the procession, in celebration of the marriage of the first accused, along the streets of Mukkamala, and accused 12 to 17 played on musical instruments and thereby abetted the offence committed by accused 2 to 9. The procession and the nautch party were said to have taken place throughout the night from 8 P. M. on 17th June 1948 till day break the next day. There is now no dispute as regards the facts because though it was denied that accused 2 to 9 danced along the street with the procession, the finding of the lower Court that they have so taken part is not now disputed by the learned counsel for the petitioners. Accused 2 to 9 are members of the Kalavanthula community who are all above 16 years of age and are unmarried. It is stated by the learned Magistrate that according to the prosecution they have undergone ceremonies and acts of initiation in accordance with the custom and usage prevailing in the said community for adopting a life of prostitution. This fact also is not disputed now. The fact that accused 12 to 17 played on musical instruments to the tune of which accused 2 to 9 danced is also conceded. But the argument of the learned counsel is that petitioners (accused 2 to 9), members of the Kalavanthula community, a community the women of which from time immemorial adopted a profession of dancing, cannot be held guilty of an offence under Act XXXI [31] of 1947 simply because they took part in the dance during the progress of the procession. It is contended that the preamble to the Act clarifies the object and intention of the enactment. The preamble is in the following terms: