Skip to content


Kisan Vs. State of Maharashtra - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectCriminal
CourtSupreme Court of India
Decided On
Case NumberCriminal Appeal No. 41 of 1977
Judge
Reported inAIR1979SC1824; 1980Supp(1)SCC390; 1979(11)LC658(SC)
ActsBombay Prohibition (Medical Examination and Blood Test) Rules, 1959 - Rule 4
AppellantKisan
RespondentState of Maharashtra
Excerpt:
.....days and not estate officer. - 1. this appeal is clearly concluded by a recent decision of this court in state of kerala etc. we are clearly of the opinion that the provisions of rule 4 are merely directory and not mandatory and if the public analyst opined that the quantity below 5cc was sufficient for the purpose of analysing the results, then the rule must be deemed to have been substantially complied with......merely directory and not mandatory and if the public analyst opined that the quantity below 5cc was sufficient for the purpose of analysing the results, then the rule must be deemed to have been substantially complied with. this is the principle on which this court in the aforementioned case held that even though the rule required a particular amount of food to be sent to public analyst, yet unless there was evidence to show that the public analyst wanted more, even a lesser quantity then specified was a sufficient compliance of the rules and would not vitiate the convictor. for these reasons, therefore, we find no merit in the appeal which is dismissed.
Judgment:

S. Murtaza Fazal Ali, J.

1. This appeal is clearly concluded by a recent decision of this Court in State of Kerala etc. etc. v. Alaserry Mohammed etc. etc. (1978) 2 SCR 520. The point involved in this case is as to whether the amount of blood sent to the Public Analyst was below the minimum prescribed by the rules. It is true that under Rule 4 of the Bombay Prohibition (Medical Examination and Blood Test) Rules, 1959, it is required that the quantity of blood to be collected shall not be less than 5 ccs. But the definite report of the Public Analyst in this case is that for his purpose 5ccs was enough to determine the question whether the accused had consumed liquor. We are clearly of the opinion that the provisions of Rule 4 are merely directory and not mandatory and if the Public Analyst opined that the quantity below 5cc was sufficient for the purpose of analysing the results, then the rule must be deemed to have been substantially complied with. This is the principle on which this Court in the aforementioned case held that even though the rule required a particular amount of food to be sent to Public Analyst, yet unless there was evidence to show that the Public Analyst wanted more, even a lesser quantity then specified was a sufficient compliance of the rules and would not vitiate the convictor. For these reasons, therefore, we find no merit in the appeal which is dismissed.


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