BAPURAO DHONDIBA JAGTAP Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner has been charge-sheeted in the Court of the learned Chief Presidency Magistrate for having contravened an order passed by the Commissioner of Police under Section 37 (3), Bombay Police Act, on 12-11-1955, and he has come before us under Article 228 of the Constitution contending that the case before the learned Chief Presidency Magistrate involves a substantial question as to the interpretation of the Constitution and therefore it should be transferred to this Court and this Court should decide that substantial question of law.

(2.) SECTION 37 (3), Police Act, empowers the Commissioner of Police by an order in writing to prohibit any assembly or procession whenever and for so long as he considers such prohibition to Be necessary for the preservation of public order. There is a proviso to this sub-section to this effect:

(3.) WHAT is urged by Mr. Kotwal on behalf of the petitioner is that Section 37 (3) of the Police Act is ultra vires of the. Constitution in that it infringes the petitioner's fundamental rights secured to him by Article 19 (1) (b) and (d ). Article 19 (1) provides that all citizens shall have the right among others, to assemble peaceably and without arms and to move freely throughout the territory of India. These rights are not absolute or unqualified rights. Sub-clause (3) of Article 19 provides: