Skip to content


Khan Baputi Dewan and ors. Vs. Bispati Pundit - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectCriminal
CourtKolkata
Decided On
Judge
Reported in(1900)ILR27Cal655
AppellantKhan Baputi Dewan and ors.
RespondentBispati Pundit
Excerpt:
cow, slaughter of - open verandah--annoyance to residents of locality--open place, meaning of--residents or passengers--general police act (v of 1861), section 34--act for the regulation of police (viii of 1895), section 13, being an act to amend act v of 1861. - .....in this open verandah does not constitute a breach of the law, not being an act 'in an open place' within the terms of section 34 as amended, and he contends that the words 'open place' coupled with road 'street,' or 'thoroughfare,' must be interpreted ejusdem generis. we are not prepared to construe the law in this limited sense. it seems to us rather that the addition of these words was intended to have a wider significance, and this seems to be shown by another amendment in the same section made at the same time, in which the annoyance, etc., caused must be not to the residents and passengers' but to 'residents or passengers.' we understand from this that the intention of the legislature was to extend the act not only to passengers, who would be on such a road, street or.....
Judgment:

Prinsep J.

1. The order in this case convicting the petitioners has been passed under Section 34 of Act V of 1861, as modified by Act VIII of 1895. It has been found that the petitioners have slaughtered a cow in an open verandah, so as to cause annoyance to the residents of that locality and in spite of their remonstrances. The learned pleader, who appears for the petitioners, contends that the slaughtering in this open verandah does not constitute a breach of the law, not being an act 'in an open place' within the terms of Section 34 as amended, and he contends that the words 'open place' coupled with road 'street,' or 'thoroughfare,' must be interpreted ejusdem generis. We are not prepared to construe the law in this limited sense. It seems to us rather that the addition of these words was intended to have a wider significance, and this seems to be shown by another amendment in the same section made at the same time, in which the annoyance, etc., caused must be not to the residents and passengers' but to 'residents or passengers.' We understand from this that the intention of the Legislature was to extend the Act not only to passengers, who would be on such a road, street or thoroughfare, but to residents, who are not passengers. This rule is, therefore, discharged.


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