STATE Vs. RUP LAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE two criminal references Nos. 20 -A and 21 of 1968 have been made respectively by Shri G. M. Mir and Hajee Ghulam Mohamad, Special Magistrates, under section 432 of the Code of Criminal Procedure as amended, as the said Magistrates were satisfied that Challan No. 2 -B (Special) of 1967 filed before the former and Challan No. 2 (Special) of 1967 filed before the latter by the Delhi Special Police Establishment involved questions as to the validity of the Delhi Special Police Establishment Act, 1946 (Act No. XXV of 1946).

(2.) BOTH these references shall be disposed of by this order as they raise identical points.

(3.) SHRI M. C. Chagla appearing for the accused has con ­tended that the Delhi Special Police Establishment Act, 1946 which purports to have been extended to the State of Jammu and Kashmir by the Jammu and Kashmir (Extension of Laws) Act, 1956 (Act LXII of 1956) is not applicable to the State as sections 5 and 6 thereof and the Jammu and Kashmir (Extension of Laws) Act, 1956, in so far as it extended the former Act to our State, were beyond the legislative compe ­tence of the Parliament, that even assuming that the former Act was validly applied to the State it was void in view of Article 254 of the Constitution. Shri Chagla has finally sub ­mitted that the Delhi Special Police Establishment Act was void being violative of Article 14 of the Constitution. The con ­tention that the consent of the State Government as contem ­plated by section 6 of the Act (i. e. Delhi Special Police Esta ­blishment Act) was not validly given though raised by his Junior, Shri D. D. Thakur, was given up by Shri Chagla.