QASIM RAZA Vs. EMPEROR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an application for the revision of an appellate order of the Sessions Judge of Agra, dismissing an appeal from an order of the City Magistrate in which he convicted the applicant of an offence under Section 30 of the Police Act of 1861 and sentenced him to pay a fine of Rs. 100. It appears however that the Magistrate intended to convict the applicant of an offence under Section 32 of the Act, which provides a penalty for disobeying orders issued under the three preceding sections or for violating the conditions of a licence. The circumstances of the case are fully stated in the orders of the Magistrate and the Sessions Judge. It is only necessary to repeat here that, the applicant, who is a Shiah Muhammadan had been, up to 1931 in the habit of taking out a procession called the "Duldul" procession from his house in the City of Agra, that in 1931 and the two following years the procession had been discontinued owing to pertain orders passed by the authorities, and that in 1934 the applicant applied both to the District Magistrate and to the Superintendent of Police for permission to take out a procession. On, a report by the Superintendent of Police, this application was refused, apparently by both the authorities applied to. After this, some time in April 1934, notices were issued by the Superintendent of Police, and one of these was affixed to the applicant's house. It evidently purports to be a notice under Sub-section (2) of Section 30, Police Act, and it contains the following order: Besides the persons who have already obtained permission no other person without obtaining permission of the Superintendent of Police will be authorized to take a procession on the public way and thoroughfare.

(2.) On April 23, the applicant made another application by telegram to the District Magistrate informing him that he was proposing to take out the procession, and this was forwarded to the Deputy Magistrate in charge of the mohalla, who sent for the applicant and informed him that his application had already been refused. We are informed by Counsel that after this the applicant asked for a written order for his use in the Civil Court, and: then decided to take out a formal procession, which he did. The procession was stopped about five paces; from his house and no trouble resulted. But the applicant was prosecuted and convicted, as described above. Both the Courts have convicted the applicant on the grounds that order refusing permission to take out a prosession was issued under Secs.30 and 31 Police Act and that as the applicant disobeyed that order, he is therefore liable to punishment under Section 32. But it has been argued by Mr. Dube that the conviction is illegal, because the order refusing permission to takeout the procession was in itself not a legal order, and in any case was; not an order passed under the provisions of Secs.30 and 31 of the Act. We may mention that two other matters were argued which may at once be disposed of. It was said that on the facts as stated by the witnesses, for the prosecution the procession was stopped before any harm was done and therefore there was no offence. This however is irrelevant, as the question is whether a legal order under the Police Act has been contra veined. It was also said that the applicant had committed no offence because the road on which he had actually taken out the procession was his private property. It has not however been, proved: that this road is his private property, and as it has been admitted that this; road is freely used as a public thoroughfare, the objection cannot be seriously considered. The more technical objection however is not so easily disposed of. Section 30, Police Act, as the marginal note shows, is one for "regulating-of public assemblies and processions, and licensing of same." Sub-section (1) shows that: The District Superintendent or Assistant. District Superintendent of Police may, as occasion requires, direct the conduct of all assemblies and processions on the public roads or in the public streets and thoroughfares and prescribe the routes from which or the time at which such processions may pass.

(3.) Sub-section (2) says: If he is satisfied that it is intended by any person or class of persons to convene or collect, an assembly in any such road, street or thoroughfare or to form a procession which would, in the judgment of the Magistrate of the District or of a Sub-Division, if uncontrolled, be likely to cause a breach of the peace, he may require by general or special notice that the person convening or collecting such assembly or directing or promoting such procession shall apply for a licence.