DAMODAR GANESH Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE applications and appeal No. 704 of 1950 have been made by petitioners who have been convicted under Section 7 of the Criminal Law Amendment Act XXIII [23] of 1932.

(2.) THE facts in all cases are almost identical, and there is no dispute about them. In August 1950, there was a dispute between the Bombay Millowners Association on the one hand and the employees of the various member mills on the other, with respect to the bonus for the year 1949. The matter was taken to the Industrial Court, Bombay, and it gave an award on 7th July 1950. Against that award the Millowners Association filed an appeal to the Appellate Tribunal on 9th August 1950. This Tribunal was constituted under the Industrial Disputes (Appellate Tribunal) Act of 1950. During the pendency of the appeal before the Appellate Tribunal, the employees of the various mills commenced a strike on 14th August 1950. On 16th August the petitioners went near the mills, and having posted themselves near the gates of the mills, distributed leaflets to the workers. It has been found as a matter of fact that the petitioners did not intimidate any workers, but were merely distributing leaflets and loitering near the mills. It has further been found that they were behaving in such a manner that their acts were sufficient to deter the workers from going to work. Thereupon, all these petitioners were arrested for having committed an offence under Section 7 of the Criminal Law Amendment Act of 1932. All of them were put up for trial before the learned Presidency Magistrate, 4th Court, Girgaum. Several legal contentions were raised particularly with regard to the validity of the Criminal Law Amendment Act of 1932 and also as to whether on the facts found, they could properly be convicted under Section 7 of that Act. The learned Presidency Magistrate rejected all the contentions and convicted the petitioners under Section 7 of the Act and sentenced them to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three months. The appellant in criminal Appeal No. 704 of 1950 was sentenced to pay a fine of Rs. 500. Against those orders this appeal and these applications in revision have been filed.

(3.) MR. Vyas has raised four contentions in support of the petitioners' case. His first contention is that the Criminal Law Amendment Act was not in force at the time when this offence was committed. Secondly, it is argued that the Act is not a valid piece of legislation. Thirdly, it is contended that the provisions contained in Section 7 of the Act are contrary to Article 19 (1) (a) and (1) (d) of the Constitution and therefore void under Article 13 (1) of the Constitution. And, lastly, it is submitted that the section under which the petitioners have been convicted viz. Section 7 (b) of the Act, does not apply to the facts of these cases.