EMPEROR Vs. SAKINABAI BUDRUDDIN LUKMANI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a reference by the Sessions Judge of Thana inviting us to set aside the conviction and sentence under Section 4 of Ordinance V of 1930, on the accused, Sakinabai, wife of Badruddin Lukmani, who was sentenced by the Resident Magistrate, Kurla, to suffer rigorous imprisonment for four months and to pay a fine of Rs. 100, in default to one month's rigorous imprisonment.

(2.) The accused is a resident of the village of Chembur, near Bombay. Two constables stated that from 10-30 a.m. till midday on the day in question the accused was standing about twenty-five or thirty paces from the country liquor shop, and that she dissuaded a certain number of persons from going into the shop. The accused alleged that there was no need for her to dissuade because there were no customers, She took no other part in the proceedings.

(3.) The Resident Magistrate, Kurla, held, firstly, that the accused was loitering near the country liquor shop at Chembur, secondly, that she did so with a view to cause the country liquor shopkeeper to abstain from keeping his shop open as ha had a right to do, and thirdly, that she hindered him in the use of the shop, and therefore she was guilty under Section 4 of the Ordinance and sentenced her as above on July 7, 1930. She did not appeal, but the learned Sessions Judge has made the present reference. His grounds shortly are that even if the learned Magistrate was right on the first point, he was wrong in his inferences on the second and the third points, the accused acted with the object of persuading people to give up drink, not of compelling the shopkeeper to give up his business, and her act did not amount to molestation as defined by Section 3 of the Ordinance.