Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 3 of 3 (0.25 seconds)Section 135 in Bombay Police Act, 1951 [Entire Act]
The State vs Azizkhan Subedarkhan on 12 December, 1955
This is the only evidence led by the prosecution so for as publicly promulgating the said order of the District Magistrate was concerned. Smt. Madbhavi is justified in the contention that an order promulgated under section 37 of the Bombay Police Act, 1951, was a temporary order in the sense that its life was only for a specified period in the instant case for eleven days. It was, therefore, necessary for the prosecution to prove that there was public promulgation of the said order i.e. either by publication in the Government Gazette and by publishing and displaying prominently in various parts of the city or by proclaiming it in various parts of city by beat of drums or 'Bataki". In the instant case the order was not published in the Government Gazette nor was there evidence to show that it was published and displayed in different parts of the city by sticking the same at prominent places. A Division Bench of this Court in the case of the State v. Azizkhan Subedarkhan has observed :---
1