STATE OF ASSAM Vs. S. JAMALUDDIN AND ANR.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE two appeals raise common questions and can be disposed, of by one judgment. Both the appeals are against the accrual passed by the Magistrate, First Class, Silchar.

(2.) RESPONDENT Jamaluddin is the husband of Musst. Aburunnessa Bibi who is the respondent in the other appeal. Jamaluddin was prosecuted Under Section 14 of the Foreigners Act. The charge against him was that he left India in the year 1950 and returned sometime in 1954 under, a Pakistan passport. He overstayed in India and thus committed breach of the passport rules. Notice was given to him in 1958 by the Deputy Commissioner, Cachar to leave India within sometime specified in the nice. He failed to leave the limits of the Cachar district' within the time specified in the notice. Thereafter he was prosecuted Under Section 14 of the Foreigners Act. The Magistrate has come to the conclusion that on the date when he returned to India in the year 1954 he was not a foreigner within the meaning of the Foreigners Act. Before the amendment of the Foreigners Act, the definition of the word 'foreigner' was given in the Act as follows:

(3.) IN appeal it is stated by the counsel for the State that the respondents were prosecuted for breach, of the order issued by the Deputy Commissioner of Cachar Under Section 3(c) or the Foreigners Act and even if on the date when the notice was issued against them any were foreigners within the meaning of the Act the prosecution was valid. That aspect of the matter does not seem to have been pressed before the Magistrate and we do not think that in this appeal we can allow that point to be raised.