TRILOKI NATH Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a revision by Triloki Nath against the order of the Sessions Judge, Meerut confirming the conviction under Section 7, Essential Supplies (Temporary Powers) Ordinance, 1946, read with Section 3, U. P. Ghee (Movement) Control Order 1845, and a fine of Rs. 200 and ordering the forfeiture of the ghee to the Government.

(2.) The facts found against the applicant by the Courts below are that he was taking three tins of ghee to Delhi from Moradabad on 26th March 1949. I have to accept these facts which are supported by evidence. The fact that, according to the accused, he was taking these tins to Mathura in these provinces via Delhi does not affect the finding that he was carrying the ghee to Delhi in contravention of Section 3, U. P. Ghee (Movement) Control Order, 1945, which is : "No person shall carry or cause to be carried or offer for carriage by rail, road or river, any ghee from any place in the United Provinces, to any place outside the United Provinces except under, and in accordance with, the terms of a permit issued by Government in this behalf." I have not quoted the two provisos which do not apply to the facts of this case,

(3.) It is contended for the applicant that this, U. P. Ghee (Movement) Control Order is ultra vires of the powers of the Governor of the United Provinces in view of Section 297, Government of India Act, 1935 and the case reported in Ram Charan v. Rex, 1949 A. L. J. 197:(A. I. R. (36) 1949 ALL. 463:50 Cr. L. J. 694). I do not agree with this contention. There is ample authority that Section 297, Government of India Act, 1935, does not impose limitations on the Provincial Government in connection with its legislative or executive power derived from sources other than the power of legislation under the Provincial Legislative List in Sch. VII, Government of India Act, 1935.