YUSOFALLI MULLA NOORBHOY Vs. KING

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an appeal by special leave against two judgments of the High Court of Judicature at Bombay, dated 17 June 1947, setting aside two orders of the Court of the Presidency Magistrate, 6 Additional Court, dated 16 September 1946, whereby two prosecutions of the appellant for the offences of hoarding and profiteering under the Hoarding and Profiteering Prevention Ordinance 1943 (Ordinance No. XXXV

(35.) of 1943) (hereinafter called "the Ordinance") were held to be barred by reason of the provisions of S. 403, Criminal P. C., since in the view of the learned Magistrate the accused had been previously tried and acquitted on exactly similar charges and facts by a Court of competent jurisdiction. The real question before the Board is whether in the circumstances of the case the plea autre fois acquit was open to the appellant, and that question in essence depends upon whether the earlier prosecution was before a Court of competent jurisdiction.

(2.) The appellant is the sole proprietor of Messrs. Alladin Dhanji, dealers in crockery, glassware and cutlery, in Bombay. He was charged in the Court of the Presidency Magistrate, 6 Additional Court, under S. 13 (1) read with S. 5 of the Ordinance with the offence of hoarding. He was also separately charged in the said Court, under S. 13 (1) read with S. 6 of the Ordinance, with the offence of profiteering. He pleaded not guilty to both charges. Section 14 of the Ordinance is in the following terms: "No prosecution for any offence punishable under this Ordinance shall be instituted except with the previous sanction of the Central or Provincial Government or of an officer not below the rank in a Presidency town of a Deputy Commissioner of Police, or elsewhere of a District Magistrate empowered by the Central or the Provincial Government to grant such sanction."