LAWS(ORI)-1966-1-4

ANKIL BEHERA Vs. STATE

Decided On January 21, 1966
ANKIL BEHERA Appellant
V/S
STATE Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE four petitioners and three others were prosecuted under Section 32 of the police Act and under Section 7 (1) (b) of the Criminal Law Amendment Act of 1932. On the petition of the accused persons, they wore tried Jointly. The trial court convicted all the accused persons under both the charges and sentenced the petitioners to undergo simple imprisonment for one month under Section 7 (1) (b)of the Criminal Law Amendment Act but passed no separate sentence under section 32. Three of the accused persons were released on probation of good conduct under the Probation of Offenders Act.

(2.) THE petitioners are said to be the members of the Communist Party at Baripada in the Dist. of Mayurbhanj. A notification under Section 30 (2) of the Police Act was promulgated and was in force in the town of Baripada for a period of three months from 15th August to 15th November 1964. As required under the said notification, a person desiring to take out a procession shall have to obtain a licence from the appropriate authorities. It is the case of the prosecution that Ram Chandra Das, a member of the communist Party at Baripada, made an application and obtained a licence Ext. 3 for taking out a procession. Certain conditions were imposed in the said licence. The conditions were that that the processionists shall not, from the gate of the state Transport Office till they pass the Collectorate Office building, raise slogans or use mikes and that the court premises shall not be encroached upon nor should the procession create any disturbance which would cause any annoyance in the court area and it will not stop anywhere on road.

(3.) THE case of the prosecution is that the accused persons on 28-8-64 violated the conditions of the licence, led the procession into the premises of the Collectorate, shouted slogans, went to the office of the Collector and A. D. M. (E) and did not disperse in spite of the direction of the Police and Magistrate. They were, therefore, arrested and prosecuted under Section 32 of the Police Act and under section 7 (1) (b) of the the Criminal Law Amendment Act, 1932.