Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home  Phrase:bombay police act 1951 maharashtra section 139

Mar 26 1993

S.M. Mallewar and others Vs. State of Maharashtra and others

  • Decided on : 26-Mar-1993

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : AIR1993Bom327; 2004(3)BomCR371; 1993(1)MhLj685

... have already held that Section 139(1)(a) of the Bombay Prohibition Act, 1949, is more in nature of conditional legislation rather than in the nature of a delegated legislation. After careful consideration of the rival submissions made at the Bar, I have no hesitation in accepting the submission made by Shri Deshpande and the learned counsel for the State of Maharashtra that the powers ... of following such traditions. In Balsara's case AIR 1951 SC318 : 1951 Cri LJ 1361 it was held by Fazl Ali, J. that the exemption granted by the Government in favour of navel forces etc. was valid. The prohibition of intoxicant liquor is introduced by stages and thus Section 139(1)(a) of the Bombay Prohibition Act confers powers on the State Government to provide for ... the subsisting licence inoperative as already discussed in the earlier part of this judgment. Accordingly the ratio of the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Commissioner of Police v. Gowardhan Bhanji shall have no application. If the Collector of Gadchiroli was required to give hearing to the licence holders, the question to be asked is as to ... 1 summarize my conclusions as under :--(i) Section 139(1)(a) of the Bombay Prohibition Act, 1949 is valid.(ii) Section 56 of the Bombay Prohibition Act, 1949 is valid.(iii) (a) The impugned order dated 14th September, 1992 is not invalid on the ground that the same is beyond the scope and ambitof Section 139(1)(a) of the Bombay Prohibition Act, 1949. The impugned order is intra vires( ...

Jul 16 2013

STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ANR Vs. INDIAN HOTEL & RETAURANTS ASSN.& ORS

  • Decided on : 16-Jul-2013

Court : Supreme Court of India

... Act No.35 of 2005, incorporating Sections 33A & 33B in the Bombay Police Act, 1951, came into force after receiving the assent of the Governot of the Maharashtra by publishing in the Maharashtra Gazette on 14th August, 2005. Writ Petitions before the High Court of Bombay 14. The Amendment to the Bombay Police Act of 1951, introducing Sections ... Sections 33A & 33B in the Bombay Police Act, 1951, came into force after receiving the assent of the Governot of the Maharashtra by publishing in the Maharashtra Gazette on 14th August, 2005. Writ Petitions before the High Court of Bombay 14. The Amendment to the Bombay Police Act of 1951, introducing Sections 33A and 33B, was challenged as being unconstitutional in several writ petitions before the High Court of Bombay ... Bombay Police Act. The necessary amendment was introduced in Maharashtra Legislative Assembly on 14th July, 2005. The Bill was passed by the Legislative Assembly on 21st July, 2005 and by the Legislative Council on 23rd July, 2005. The amended Act No.35 of 2005, incorporating Sections 33A & 33B in the Bombay Police Act, 1951, came into force after receiving the assent of the Governot of the Maharashtra by publishing in the Maharashtra ...

Feb 05 2009

Anami Narayan Roy, Indian Inhabitant and Ors. Vs. Suprakash Chakravart ...

  • Decided on : 05-Feb-2009

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : 2009(3)BomCR221; 2009(111)BomLR869

... Police' (Inspector General of Police), other posts of Director General of Police and conditions of service of that post.31. In terms of Section 3 of the Bombay Police Act, 1951, there is one Police Force for the whole of the State of Maharashtra and such police force shall include every Police Officer referred to in Clause (6) of Section 2. Section 5 thereof deals with the Constitution of Police ... Police later on termed as 'Director General of Police' (Inspector General of Police), other posts of Director General of Police and conditions of service of that post.31. In terms of Section 3 of the Bombay Police Act, 1951, there is one Police Force for the whole of the State of Maharashtra and such police force shall include every Police Officer referred to in Clause (6) of Section 2. Section ... Police), other posts of Director General of Police and conditions of service of that post.31. In terms of Section 3 of the Bombay Police Act, 1951, there is one Police Force for the whole of the State of Maharashtra and such police force shall include every Police Officer referred to in Clause (6) of Section 2. Section 5 thereof deals with the Constitution of Police Force, which lays down that the Police ...

Dec 15 1975

N.P. Nathwani Vs. The Commissioner of Police

  • Decided on : 15-Dec-1975

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : (1976)78BOMLR1

... No. 1 (Commissioner of Police for Greater Bombay) but relying upon his own general orders issued from time to time under Section 37(3) of the Bombay Police Act, 1951 (prohibiting all assemblies throughout Greater Bombay except with his permission) as also relying upon the general order dated October 14, 1975 issued by respondent No. 2 (State of Maharashtra) under Rule 69 read ... 1975 the Government of Maharashtra accorded sanction for ex-lending the period of prohibitory orders issued under Section 37(3) of the Bombay Police Act, 1951 for a further period of one month with effect from October 10, 1975. In view of the said order, the order dated October 1, 1975 was continued by the Commissioner of Police, Greater Bombay, for a period ... Commissioner of Police for the duration of one week on October 1, 1975 and prohibition of assembly and procession was imposed for the period October 3, 1975 to October 10, 1975. On October 9, 1975 the Government of Maharashtra accorded sanction for ex-lending the period of prohibitory orders issued under Section 37(3) of the Bombay Police Act, 1951 for ... of five or more persons and any procession in the area in Greater Bombay hereinafter mentioned;NOW, THEREFORE, I, Shridhar Vyankatesh Tankhiwale, IPS., Commissioner of Police, Greater Bombay, in exercise of the powers conferred upon me by Sub-section (3) of Section 37 of the Bombay Police Act, 1951, (Bombay Act XXII of 1951), prohibit-(i) any assembly of five or more than five persons, and(ii ...

Apr 12 2006

Indian Hotel and Restaurants Association (AHAR), an Association duly r ...

  • Decided on : 12-Apr-2006

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : 2006(3)BomCR705

... Maharashtra Act No. 35 of 2005 is not applicable to the petitioners members:Writ Petition No. 2450 of 2005 was amended by adding the following prayer clause:(aa) that this Hon'ble Court be pleased by an appropriate Writ/Direction to declare that the provisions of the amending Act XXV of 2005 amending the provisions of the Bombay Police Act, 1951 by introducing Section 33(A) and Section ... LX of 2005 as introduced in the Maharashtra Legislative Assembly on 14th June, 2005 reads as under:(1) The Commissioner of Police, District Magistrates or other officers, being Licensing Authorities under the Rules framed in exercise of the powers of Sub-section (1) of Section 33 of the Bombay Police Act, 1951 have granted licences for holding dance performance ... the provisions of the amending Act XXV of 2005 amending the provisions of the Bombay Police Act, 1951 by introducing Section 33(A) and Section 33(B) are not applicable to the establishments of the members of the Petitioners' Association who hold the requisite licences under Section 2(9) and 2(10) of the Bombay Police Act, 1951. It is submitted on ... Bombay Police Act, 1951 by introducing Section 33(A) and Section 33(B) are not applicable to the establishments of the members of the Petitioners' Association who hold the requisite licences under Section 2(9) and 2(10) of the Bombay Police Act, 1951. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioners that the establishments of the members are places of public entertainment as defined under Section ...

Jan 31 2008

The State of Maharashtra and Ors. Vs. S.P. Kalamkar

  • Decided on : 31-Jan-2008

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : 2008(2)ALLMR649; 2008(2)BomCR575; (2008)110BOMLR512; 2008(4)MhLj553

... Police / Inspector General of Police. 24. In the decision rendered by this Court in the case of Nitin J. Raut v. State of Maharashtra and Anr. (Supra) in para 8 and 9 of the reported judgment, this Court has already taken a view that the case of the personnel of police force stands protected by s.26 of the Bombay Police Act, 1951. Section 26 of the Bombay Police Act, 1951 ... challenged the order before Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal which held that the State having failed to comply with the provisions of Section 26 of the Bombay Police Act, 1951, the impugned order of removal of Police Officers who were serving as Senior Police Inspectors came to be quashed and set aside. The State has challenged the order of the Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal in both ... removed all the three Police Officers from service. 5. Mr. Vinayak Raosaheb Patil and Mr. Suhas P.Kalamkar challenged the order before Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal which held that the State having failed to comply with the provisions of Section 26 of the Bombay Police Act, 1951, the impugned order of removal of Police Officers who were serving as Senior Police Inspectors came to ... of compliance of Section 26 of the Bombay Police Act, 1951 which carves out an exception to the mandate of Article 311 of the Constitution of India and the proviso to Section 26 of the said act and has placed reliance on the recent decision of this Court rendered in the case of Nitin Janardhan Raut v. State of Maharashtra and Anr. reported ...

Aug 11 1989

Rizwan Ahmed Javed Shaikh and Ors. Vs. Jammal Patel, S.I. and Ors.

  • Decided on : 11-Aug-1989

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : 1990(2)BomCR297

... sections 220 and 342 of the Indian Penal Code and under sections 147 and 148 of Bombay Police Act, 1951. Respondent Nos. 2 to 4 are the Police Officers attached to Chembur Police Station. Respondent No. 5 is Senior Police Inspector attached to Bhandup Police Station. Respondent No. 6 is the Commissioner of Police. Greater Bombay. Respondent No. 7 is the Home Department and Respondent No. 8 is the State of Maharashtra ... Maharashtra hereby directs that the provisions of the sub-section (2) of that section shall apply to the following categories of the members of the Force in the State charged with the maintenance of public order wherever they may be serving namely :-(1) All Police Officers as defined in the Bombay Police Act, 1951 (Bom. XXII of 1951), other than the Special or Additional Police Officers appointed under section ... section 197 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), the Government of Maharashtra hereby directs that the provisions of the sub-section (2) of that section shall apply to the following categories of the members of the Force in the State charged with the maintenance of public order wherever they may be serving namely :-(1) All Police Officers as defined in the Bombay Police Act, 1951 ...

Apr 12 1966

M.A. Khan Vs. State and Anr.

  • Decided on : 12-Apr-1966

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : 1967CriLJ994

... persons ordered to be detained in any place in the State of Maharashtra under the Defence of India Rules. shall be the same as those contained in the Bombay Conditions of Detention Order, 1957.3. The grievance of the petitioner centres on Clause 16 of the Bombay Conditions of Detention Order, 1951, which relates to books and newspapers which can be received by security ... person, acting in pursuance of the Act, shall adopt such action as in its or his judgment accords with the principle of least interference. It appears to us, on the other hand, that the terms of that section are mandatory, that authorities and persons acting in pursuance of the Act. are bound to abide by the principle laid down In that section, and that acts done in ... they preached violence. In a supplementary affidavit the Under Secretary stated further that several issues of the daily newspaper 'Dawat' were examined by the office of the Inspector General of Police and that, as a result of the detailed scrutiny made by the said office, the Government came to the conclusion that the said paper was unsuitable for being permitted to ... written and which he wanted to have published. It was contended on behalf of the Government of Maharashtra that a detenu can exercise only such privileges as are conferred on him by the order of detention and that the provisions of Bombay Conditions of Detention Order, 1951, did not confer on the detenu any privilege to write a book and send it out ...

Nov 23 2011

Ramarai Rammilan Rai Vs. State Of Maharashtra

  • Decided on : 23-Nov-2011

Court : Mumbai

... ble Minister for Home Affairs, Government of Maharashtra has dismissed the said Appeal. 10. Mr. Kansara for the Petitioner advanced following submissions : (a) The Petitioner or his co-licensee have not been prosecuted and they have not committed any offence and that the criminal prosecution under Section 110,117 and 33 of the Bombay Police Act, 1951 is pending and hence, facts or ... 2009 the Local Act Offences were registered under Sections 110 and 117 of the Bombay Police Act, 1951; whereas Local Act Offence No. 2350/2009 and 2352/2009 was registered against the Manager Ganesh Bhoja Shetty under Section 33(w) read with Section 131 of BP Act,1951 and CR No. 2351/2009 and 2353/2009 were registered under Section 33(w) read with Section 131 of the BP Act, 1951 against Cashier ... of Police, Mumbai. The relevant provisions are Sections 2(5A): Eating House, 2(10) : "Place of public entertainment" , Section 33(1)(w),(y),(xa) and Sections 110, 117, 131 and 162 of the BP Act, 1951 and Rules 1,2,3,6,8,21, 21-A, 24 and 27 of the Rules framed by the Commissioner of Police under Section 33 of the Bombay Police Act, 1951. The ... Bombay Police Act, 1951 and 1953 Rules framed by the Commissioner of Police, Mumbai. The relevant provisions are Sections 2(5A): Eating House, 2(10) : "Place of public entertainment" , Section 33(1)(w),(y),(xa) and Sections 110, 117, 131 and 162 of the BP Act, 1951 and Rules 1,2,3,6,8,21, 21-A, 24 and 27 of the Rules framed by the Commissioner of Police under Section ...

Oct 01 2013

Kishore Baliram Balu Vs. Dy Comr of Police, Zone-I and Others

  • Decided on : 01-Oct-2013

Court : Mumbai

... have had to deal with a quite extraordinary number of petitions challenging appellate orders under Section 60 of the Bombay Police Act, 1951 in externment proceedings. Those appellate orders have been passed by one Mr. Vineet Agarwal, the 2nd Respondent in this case. In VinayakDynaneshwar Mainkar v State of Maharashtra and Ors we had occasion to criticize Mr. Agarwal for his approach in these ... nothing whatever to do with Section 56 of the Bombay Police Act, 1951. How that concept of [public] peace could inveigle itself into the Bombay Police Act is a mystery that perhaps only Mr. Agarwal can unravel (The phrase public peace is used verbtaimlater in the appellate order.). He then proceeds to suggest that it matters not under what section of the Bombay Police Act, 1951 the action is proposed so ... under Section 56(1)(b) of the Bombay Police Act, 1951. That, at least, is what the externment order says. It does not reference Section 56(1)(a) at all. But, as Mr. Tripathi, Learned Advocate for the Petitioner points out, the body of the externment order refers to considerations and factors that are to be found in Section 56(1)(a) of that Act. Section ... not under what section of the Bombay Police Act, 1951 the action is proposed so long as some action is taken. This may seem to Mr. Agarwal to be a robust way of assessing the appeal before him. To us, it seems utterly cavalier and off-hand, a striking example of precisely that which the Supreme Court deplored, a public authority acting fast ...

Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //