Skip to content


Ram Narayan Singh and anr. Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectConstitution
CourtSupreme Court of India
Decided On
Case NumberWrit Petition No. 5883 of 1980
Judge
Reported in(1981)2SCC757
ActsCode of Criminal Procedure (U.P. Amendment) Act, 1976 (U.P. Act 16 of 1976) - Section 9; Constitution Of India - Articles 19, 14 and 21, 254(2)
AppellantRam Narayan Singh and anr.
RespondentState of Uttar Pradesh
Excerpt:
- [ a. varadarajan and; s. murtaza fazal ali, jj.] -- criminal procedure code (u.p. amendment) act, 1976 (u.p. act 16 of 1976) — section 9 — whether violative of articles 19, 14 and 21 — since the question involves a substantial issue of law having far-reaching consequences, the case be placed for being heard by a larger bench -- section 438 of the code of criminal procedure was introduced by the parliament as being applicable to the entire country. the question, however, remains whether or not the impugned act could stand the scrutiny of articles 14, 19 and 21 of the constitution. liberty to mention......of various articles of the constitution and would have far-reaching consequences, not only, in the state of u.p. but in other states, if they choose to follow suit and adopt the stand taken by the u.p. legislature. section 438 of the code of criminal procedure was introduced by the parliament as being applicable to the entire country. perhaps it may be reasonably argued that the state (u.p.) legislature was competent to pass this legislation as it has received the assent of the president under article 254(2) and the impugned act would prevail in the state of u.p. the question, however, remains whether or not the impugned act could stand the scrutiny of articles 14, 19 and 21 of the constitution. we, therefore, direct that this case be placed before hon'ble the chief justice.....
Judgment:

S. MURTAZA FAZAL ALI, J.

1. In this petition the vires of Section 9 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (U.P. Amendment) Act, 1976 (U.P. Act 16 of 1976) has been challenged on the ground that this section is violative of Articles 19, 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India. The point involved is a very substantial question of law as to the interpretation and application of various articles of the Constitution and would have far-reaching consequences, not only, in the State of U.P. but in other States, if they choose to follow suit and adopt the stand taken by the U.P. legislature. Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure was introduced by the Parliament as being applicable to the entire country. Perhaps it may be reasonably argued that the State (U.P.) legislature was competent to pass this legislation as it has received the assent of the President under Article 254(2) and the impugned Act would prevail in the State of U.P. The question, however, remains whether or not the impugned Act could stand the scrutiny of Articles 14, 19 and 21 of the Constitution. We, therefore, direct that this case be placed before Hon'ble the Chief Justice for being heard by a larger Bench, if not the Constitution Bench. Liberty to mention.


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